Vh.3**/^ • ^ fi-f^ ^ '"^ -^^^
S. Hrg. 103-545
U.S. REFUGEE PROGRAMS FOR 1994:
ANNUAL REFUGEE CONSULTATIONS
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED THIRD CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
ON
EXAMINING THE U.S. REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT ADMISSIONS PROGRAM
FOR FISCAL YEAR 1994 AND THE ROLE OF THE IMMIGRATION AND
NATURALIZATION SERVICE IN THE PROGRAM
RECEIVED
PTEMBER 23, 1993
Seiiial No. J-103-29
NOV 1 7 2003
-t'ijiUuJ.fVJi-ithafs^ ^f the Committee on the Judiciary
BOSTON PUBLIC ut5H.-\r.
^f^wcRMMPNT DOCUMENTS DEPART ^^t.
KF
4S36
.A2
U63
1994
U.S. GOVEHNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office
srintendent of Documents, Congressional Sales Office, Washington, DC 20402
ISBN 0-16-044384-9
1 n '
S. Hrg. 103-545
U.S. REFUGEE PROGRAMS FOR 1994:
ANNUAL REFUGEE CONSULTATIONS
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICL\KY
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED THIRD CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
ON
EXAMINING THE U.S. REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT ADMISSIONS PROGRAM
FOR FISCAL YEAR 1994 AND THE ROLE OF THE IMMIGRATION AND
NATURALIZATION SERVICE IN THE PROGRAM
RECEIVED
PTEMBER 23, 1993
Seriial No. J-103-29
NOV 1 ^ 2003
boston' f^tl^l^^t'tlBt^.^'?'' ^'""''''' " '''' '""^'""^
^.nupRMh^PNT DOCUMENTS DEPART i^^^
KF
4S36
.A2
U63
1994
U.S. gove:
For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office
irintendent of Documents, Congressional Sales Office, Washington, DC 20402
ISBN 0-16-044384-9
KF 4836 .A2 U63 1994
United States. Congress,
Senate. Ckxirnittee on the
U.S. refugee prograns for
1994
EDWARD V.
HOWARD ^
DENNIS De
PATRICK J
HOWELL H
PAUL SIMC
HERBERT ]
DLANNE FI
CAROL MO
KF. 4836 .A2 063 1994
auted States, c^'^,
iSo/^^-'^^ Prograne for
jlina
HAMPDEN LAW LIBRARY
50 STATE ST., BOX 559
SPRINGFIELD, MA. 01102-0559
DEMCO
CONTENTS
STATEMENTS OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Page
Kennedy, Hon. Edward M., a U.S. Senator from the State of Massachusetts ... 1
Simpson, Hon. Alan K., a U.S. Senator from the State of Wyoming 2
Cohen, Hon. WilUam S., a U.S. Senator from the State of Maine 3
Thurmond, Hon. Strom, a U.S. Senator from the State of South Carohna 4
DeConcini, Hon. Dennis, a U.S. Senator from the State of Arizona 5
Metzenbaum, Hon. Howard M., a U.S. Senator from the State of Ohio 54
Simon, Hon. Paul, a U.S. Senator from the State of Illinois 57
Grassley, Hon. Charles E., a U.S. Senator from the State of Iowa 59
Specter, Hon. Arlen, a U.S. Senator from the State of Pennsylvania 61
CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF WITNESSES
Hon. Warren M. Christopher, Secretary of State; accompanied by Warren
Zimmermann, Director, Bureau for Refugee Programs, Department of State;
Chris Sale, Acting Commissioner, Immigration and Naturalization Service;
and Lavinia Limon, Director, Office of Refugee Resettlement, Department
of Heedth and Human Services 6
ALPHABETICAL LIST AND MATERLU. SUBMITTED
Christopher, Warren M.: Testimony 6
Limon, Lavinia:
Prepared statement 10
A report to the Congress on "Proposed Refugee Admissions for Fiscal
Year 1994" 11
Sale, Chris;
Testimony 57
Prepared statement 58
APPENDIX
Exchange of Correspondence Relative to the Consultations and
Presidential Determination on. the Admission of Refugees for 1994
Letters to Senator Kennedy from:
Warren Zimmermann, Director, Bureau for Refugee Programs, U.S. De-
partment of State, Sept. 20, 1993 63
Wendy R. Sherman, Assistant Secretary, Legislative Affairs, U.S. Depart-
ment of State, Oct. 8, 1993 65
Letter to the President of the United States from Senators Biden, Kennedy,
Hatch, and Simpson, Sept. 27, 1993 66
Memorandum for the Secretary of State, from the President of the United
States, Oct. 1, 1993 67
Questions and Answers
Questions for Secretary of State Warren Christopher, submitted by:
Senator Kennedy 69
Senator Simpson 69
The Senate Judiciary Committee 73, 77
Senator Grassley 73
Senator DeConcini 76
(III)
rv
Page
Statistical Summary of Refugee Admissions to the United States
Since 1975
Charts: _^
Summary of Refugee Admissions oi
Indochinese Refugee Activities °4
U.S. REFUGEE PROGRAMS FOR 1994: ANNUAL
REFUGEE CONSULTATIONS
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 1993
U.S. Senate,
Committee on the Judiciary,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:30 p.m., in room
SD-226, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Edward M. Kennedy
presiding.
Also present: Senators Metzenbaum, Simon, Thurmond, Simp-
son, Grassley, Specter, and Cohen.
Staff present: Jerry M. Tinker, staff director and Richard W.
Day, minority chief counsel of the Subcommittee on Immigration
and Refugee Affairs.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. EDWARD M. KENNEDY, A U.S.
SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS
Senator KENNEDY. The committee will come to order. It is an
honor to welcome Secretary of State Warren Christopher to the Ju-
diciary Committee. In light of the dramatic developments taking
place in the world today, we are especially grateful to the Secretary
for taking time to meet with us this afternoon for our annual con-
sultation on refugee admissions into the United States.
All of us wish Secretary Christopher well in meeting his impor-
tant foreign policy responsibilities. He is one of the Nation's out-
standing public servants, and it has been a privilege to work with
him in his past incarnations in the State Department and the Jus-
tice Department. We have great confidence in his ability and judg-
ment, and so does President Clinton. Clearly, he is on a tight
schedule today and we have agreed to expedite our hearing to ac-
commodate him, and I have asked all the Senators to limit the
opening statements to 3 minutes and they will hopefully do so.
As Deputy Secretary of State in President Carter's administra-
tion. Secretary Christopher was the lead-off witness in this commit-
tee's original hearing in March 1979 on the landmark bill that is
still the foundation of our refugee policy today. The Refugee Act of
1980.
I might say, Mr. Secretary, in looking through this big volume
on the legislative history of the act, you are the first one here on
page 6 and your comments then, as I know today, have importance
to us on refugee issues.
So Secretary Christopher has a distinguished background in ref-
ugee issues and we are delighted to have his guidance and counsel
today.
(1)
The extraordinary changes taking place in the world also have
immense effect on the plight of refugees, the homeless, and millions
of other displaced persons in many different lands. The challenges
before us have rarely been greater. The way we deal with them has
major consequences for international peace and stability. The col-
lapse of communism has brought freedom to millions, but for many
others it has unleashed a firestorm of repressed ethnic hatreds and
violent nationalism. We know that war creates refugees, and as we
are sadly learning, so does peace.
As a result, the resources and capabilities of the United States
and other countries, the United Nations, and all international relief
organizations have been stretched to the breaking point, and it is
these issues and concerns that we will be discussing today. I look
forward to the Secretary's testimony and to the administration's
proposals for refugee admissions into the United States in the com-
ing year.
I might add, Mr. Secretary, even though there has been a signifi-
cant reduction in our overall foreign aid budget, the amounts that
are being focused on refugees and refugee assistance have had a
modest increase, which I think is important.
My good friend and colleague. Senator Simpson, I was pointing
out that Secretary Christopher testified in 1979 on the Refugee
Act, and so he has had an enormously distinguished public career,
but he also has had a great interest in the issues of refugees.
Senator Simpson?
Senator Simpson. Mr. Chairman, that is very true, and that was
my first year on the Judiciary Committee and you were the chair-
man. You were very helpful to me in my activities with the com-
mittee, and I remember distinctly the Refugee Act. At that time,
I knew very little of the subject, and then I think it must have
been your work putting me on the Select Commission, which was
one of the most grotesque jobs I had ever had. [Laughter.]
Senator Kennedy. I have got some other assignments for you,
too.
Senator Simpson. I know that.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ALAN K. SIMPSON, A U.S.
SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WYOMING
Senator Simpson. And I do know this; I do know what Senator
Kennedy has done on the issue of immigration and refugee matters
for many years. He has been a great supporter and help to me
when I was chairman, even though there may have been times
when he did not support it with a vote; but he was always there
with his helpful counsel, and I mean that and I appreciate it.
To you, sir, it is wonderful to have you here. I have always had
great admiration and regard for you, gained over many years, and
I have shared that with you on many occasions and in many fo-
rums. It was indeed 15 years ago when you appeared representing
the Carter administration to present legislation which became the
Refugee Act. It was the creation of Senator Kennedy and the able
man who sits at his right, Jerry Tinker, who has been a staff as-
sistant of extraordinary dimension through the years.
Our good friend, Dick Clark, was also heavily involved in that at
the time and participated at the hearing as the first coordinator for
refugee affairs. In his testimony — I looked back at that, too — he
noted that the new legislation defined a refugee as "someone out-
side his or her country who is unable or unwilling to return to that
country because of a well-founded fear of persecution," something
we obviously seem to have forgotten.
He also noted that the administration's legislation then provided
for a "more or less predictable flow or normal flow of refugees each
year," and he said that the "normal flow" allowed the admission of
up to 50,000 refugees annually. Senator Thurmond noted at that
hearing that that was a substantial increase over the annual quota
of 17,400 refugees in our law at that time. I guess to paraphrase
that cigarette ad, we have come a long way, Mr. Secretary, from
that.
For the 15th consecutive year, the administration is asking for
admissions well in excess of the "normal flow," about ^Vi times as
many this year, and about 85 percent of them will come from with-
in their own country of nationality, not outside — an extraordinary
departure. It appears to me that our refugee program has become
for the most part an immigration program in refugee clothing, and
with refugee funding, which is, of course, what keeps them from
going into immigration.
Don't misunderstand me, please. I firmly believe we should ac-
cept our share of the world's refugees who must have third-country
resettlement and meet the test of a well-founded fear, and I believe
our share is probably substantially larger than any other country's.
But we have allowed our program to turn into an immigration pro-
gram, while at the same time the U.N. High Commissioner for Ref-
ugees has difficulty finding resettlement opportunities for the few
thousand refugees who she believes really do meet the test and
need to find a new place to live, and the ones who truly must flee
their homelands for their safety or their freedom. So I look forward
to the hearings.
Ambassador Zimmermann, it is nice to see you. I know of your
skills and diplomatic abilities and have learned of that over the
years. And to the rest of the panel, Ms. Limon, Ms. Sale, you are
not unknown to me in your work in this area and we thank you
for your participation. Hopefully, we can get to some of the serious
concerns and deal with them openly as we must.
I thank the Chairman very much.
Senator Kennedy. Thank you very much.
Senator Simon?
Senator SiMON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am just going to
leave my remarks until we get to the question period.
Senator Kennedy. Senator Cohen?
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM S. COHEN, A U.S.
SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MAINE
Senator Cohen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I may not be able to
stay for the entire hearing. I will take this opportunity to say I
have worked with Secretary Christopher in other capacities. He
has made an enormous contribution to this country and continues
to do so in his present capacity.
One of the questions I would raise, if I am able to remain
throughout the hearing, deals with Iraqi prisoners, those who
fought during the war on the side of Iraq who either defected or
who were captured and retained as POW's in Saudi Arabia. My un-
derstanding is roughly 1,000 of the Iraqi soldiers and their families
have been admitted to this country as refugees.
Last month as we debated the defense authorization bill, an
amendment was offered, a sense of the Senate resolution, that
would proscribe the admission of these Iraqi soldiers as refugees.
It would condition admission upon the State Department or the
President certifying that the individuals, number one, cooperated
with the United States following their defection or their capture
and, number two, were not guilty of war crimes.
I would like to know either through the testimony or through ar
answer submitted for the record as to whether or not the State De-
partment supports such restrictions and would, in fact, propose
such restrictions in their regulatory process. It is something that
I am concerned about and I think the American people are con-
cerned about.
One of the things that caused us to get into the war in the first
instance was the report of the atrocities being committed by the
Iraqis of rape, pillage, plunder and the kind of barbarism that the
whole civilized world is revolted by. To the extent that any of these
individuals had engaged in that conduct, it seems to me, notwith-
standing the fact they may have difficulties going back to Iraq to
face Saddam Hussein, they ought not to be granted status as refu-
gees in this country. I hope to pursue this during the course of the
question and answer period if I am here, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Kennedy. Senator Thurmond?
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. STROM THURMOND, A U.S.
SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Senator Thurmond. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman,
the hearing today concerns the issue of how many refugees this
country should admit during the next fiscal year.
Our Nation has a long and proud tradition of accepting refugees
from other countries who are fleeing persecution. On the other
hand, the American people do not expect their generosity to be
abused. Based on contacts with large numbers of upset American
citizens from across the country, it appears that public support is
diminishing for current refugee and immigration policies because of
severe problems with the asylum process, as well as the large
amount of illegal immigration.
Americans are deeply concerned because of the view that the im-
migration system encourages fraud by allowing unqualified aliens
to circumvent our laws and readily enter our country simply by
claiming asylum. Whether from inadequate staffing or loose proce-
dures, arriving aliens are not given an immediate hearing on un-
substantiated claims for asylum. Instead, they generally are re-
leased into our communities, given permission to work, and simply
asked to return months later for a hearing.
Not surprisingly, very few ever show up for their asylum hear-
ings. In an effort to address this problem, I am a cosponsor of S.
667, the Port of Entry Inspections Improvement Act. This bill was
authored by Senator Simpson, who deserves our thanks for his tire-
less work in this area. In addition, the administration has proposed
legislation to address this vital issue.
The other primary problem is the flood of illegal aliens. Action
must be taken to sharply reduce this illegal flow, including in-
creased enforcement along our borders. There is growing public
sentiment that reductions should be made in the amount of legal
immigration and refugees admitted if we are unable to stop the in-
flux of illegal immigrants.
Mr. Chairman, I look forward to hearing from the witnesses
today and, in particular, our distinguished Secretary of State, Mr.
Warren Christopher, and thank them for their time and effort in
being here.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Kennedy. Thank you very much. At Senator DeConcini's
request, I will submit for the record his statement, since he is un-
able to be here this morning.
[The prepared statement of Senator DeConcini follows:]
Prepared Statement of Senator DeConcini
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to participate in our annual refugee consultations
with the administration, and I welcome our distinguished witnesses.
As you may recall, during last year's consultation hearings I addressed one of the
most pressing refugee problems in the world — the conflict in the former Yugoslavia,
and in Bosnia-Herzegovina in particular. Tragically, the number of refugees and dis-
placed persons from this war torn country has increased dramatically since that
time. Today, there are more than two million persons, over half the population of
Bosnia-Herzegovina, forced from their homes due to ethnic cleansing, at least one
milUon of whom have fled the country altogether.
In 1992, as co-chairman of the Helsinki Commission, I traveled to Macedonia and
Croatia and met with refugees and released detainees from Bosnia-Herzegovina.
Their stories documented organized, systematic and premeditated war crimes per-
petrated against innocent civilians, including children.
These include willful killings, rape, forced impregnation, abuse of civilians in de-
tention centers, deliberate attacks on noncombatants, ethnic cleansing through forc-
ible expulsion and mass killings, and torture of prisoners. Some of these atrocities
continue to this day. The horrors of Bosnia have gone on for far too long.
Will these refugees and displaced persons ever be able to return to their homes?
Are we going to insist on the forced repatriation of the victims of ethnic cleansing?
If not, are we working on a comprehensive plan with our allies to resettle those who
have no homes to return to?
I look forward to hearing from the witnesses on what we are doing in response
to this crisis that only continues to escalate.
WELCOME TO WITNESSES
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Secretary, I just want to mention — ^you
probably are already aware — that the President has introduced leg-
islation on asylum reform on July 27, and we are going to have the
hearing on Doris Meissner next week, who will be the next INS
Commissioner, and we will be dealing with these larger immigra-
tion and asylum issues.
The Attorney General herself has indicated that she was looking
forward to both the nomination of Ms. Meissner and her own testi-
mony here, when we will have a chance to go into this. Also, the
Attorney General has indicated a willingness to come up and visit
with the committee on the issue of asylum reform. There is great
interest in it, and we know of the paramount responsibility that
the Justice Department has in this area. Senators are obviously
going to inquire whatever way they want, but we did want you to
know at least what our order of business is on that issue.
We want to welcome Ambassador Warren Zimmermann, who is
Director of the Bureau of Refugee Programs of the Department of
State. He has appeared before this committee and assisted us
many times before. We are delighted to welcome you back.
Ms. Chris Sale is the Acting Commissioner of the Immigration
and Naturalization Service, and Ms. Lavinia Limon is the new Di-
rector of the Office of Refugee Resettlement in the Department of
Health and Human Services. She comes to that position after long
experience of work with voluntary agencies and local authorities in-
volved in refugee resettlement. We welcome all of you.
We would ask the Secretary to make what comments he would.
STATEMENT OF HON. WARREN M. CHRISTOPHER, SECRETARY
OF STATE; ACCOMPANIED BY WARREN ZIMMERMANN, DI-
RECTOR, BUREAU FOR REFUGEE PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENT
OF STATE; CHRIS SALE, ACTING COMMISSIONER, IMMIGRA-
TION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE; AND LAVINIA LIMON,
DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT, DEPART-
MENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Secretary Christopher. Mr. Chairman, members of the commit-
tee, thank you for your comments, Mr. Chairman and members. I
do indeed have a deep interest in the refugee problem, and I am
thus particularly pleased to appear before the committee today to
outline the President's proposal for the admission of 120,000 refu-
gees to the United States in the next fiscal year.
The committee has already received a report which is required
by statute that provides detailed information about refugee admis-
sions, as required by the act. It is our hope that the 1994 refugee
admissions program will receive the broad bipartisan support from
the Congress that it has received in the past.
Before turning to the refugee programs, Mr. Chairman, I would
like to comment briefly on the past year's worldwide refugee situa-
tion and the future direction of U.S. refugee policy. Late last night,
I shortened my remarks considerably, but I will make a few before
turning to your questions.
WORLD REFUGEE SITUATION
Positive changes in several parts of the world have reduced the
push factor — that is, the conditions that impel people to leave their
countries — and increased the pull factor — that is, conditions that
cause people to return home. In Cambodia, a major repatriation ef-
fort directed by the UNHCR resulted in the return of about
370,000 persons from the camps along the Thai-Cambodian border.
An internationally sanctioned election in May in Cambodia will en-
able the repatriated refugees to rebuild their society, a most un-
usual and desirable turn of events.
In Afghanistan and Central America, many refugees continue to
return home. Following a political settlement in Mozambique, up-
wards of 200,000 refugees have returned home in the past year.
To turn to future events that might be very promising, for the
first time in almost 2 years there is hope that respect for human
rights and democracy will be restored in Haiti. When implemented,
the Governor's Island accords, together with the resumption of eco-
nomic development, will help put an end to the despair that has
caused so many Haitians to leave their country.
As we all know, the prospects for peace in the Middle East have
never been brighter. The agreement signed in Washington a week
ago last Monday is a major step in a process that will address the
needs of the Palestinian refugees. We are only at the beginning and
much work remains to be done, but the foundations have been
firmly laid. It is now the responsibility of the United States and the
rest of the international community to help the Palestinians and
the Israelis to continue the peace process.
On the other hand, Mr. Chairman, genuine human tragedies in
the former Yugoslavia and the Horn of Africa are creating hun-
dreds of thousands of refugees. In Bosnia-Herzegovina, we continue
our efforts to assist the more than 4 million displaced persons and
refugees in that area. The United States has contributed over $350
million to that relief effort, more than any other single country. We
continue to look for ways and means to increase that assistance.
We are very concerned about the shortage of both funding and
food for the U.N. agencies working in the former Yugoslavia. Under
almost any scenario, the problems of food and shelter will be a
major challenge to the international community this winter. We are
encouraging action by other nations, especially European countries,
which we believe have a special responsibility for providing human-
itarian aid in this region.
MIGRATION PRESSURES
In addition to these widely publicized conflicts, there is an over-
all migration of persons around the world as a result of a number
of factors — population pressures, poverty, environmental degrada-
tion, and many other factors. While seeking to aid refugees, we
must be resolute in our efforts to improve conditions at home so as
to make it possible for would-be migrants to opt to remain where
they are. This administration's determination to spur economic
growth through such international trade programs as the Uruguay
Round and NAFTA will help; so will our work on global issues such
as population and environment.
I would stress, Mr. Chairman, that while legal immigration en-
riches our country, it is also important to reduce illegal immigra-
tion. The President has already taken significant steps and has
placed before Congress, as you say, proposals to address illegal im-
migration to the United States in a more effective manner.
Improvements include increasing border control resources, im-
proving visa issuance procedures, repatriating illegal and criminal
aliens, and increasing criminal penalties for alien smuggling which
lies at the heart of a number of these problems, especially the re-
cent problems with Chinese immigrants. At the same time, we will
seek to ensure genuine protection for real refugees who are fleeing
persecution.
ESCALATION IN REFUGEE-NEEDS
Ten years ago, there were approximately 8 million refugees
worldwide. Now, it is estimated there are about 18 million. Ten
8
years ago, most of those assisted had crossed an international bor-
der to become refugees, as Senator Simpson said. Now, many popu-
lations receiving assistance are displaced persons still within their
own national borders. This complicates relief efforts and also cre-
ates security problems for U.N. and NGO personnel engaged in re-
lief in such dangerous places as Bosnia and Somalia.
In responding to large-scale refugee emergencies, we believe two
objectives must be pursued simultaneously; first, humanitarian as-
sistance and protection for those in need and, second, seeking dura-
ble solutions, especially conflict resolution and repatriation when
conditions permit. We must recognize that third-country resettle-
ment, while an appropriate means in many instances, is not a real-
istic alternative for the great majority of the world's nearly 18 mil-
lion refugees.
As reported to this committee last year, current trends indicate
that the number of persons requiring permanent resettlement in
the United States should decline significantly in the next few years
unless there are major unexpected developments. By year end, we
will have met the commitment to resettle in the United States all
known and eligible Amerasian children and their families from
Vietnam. Within the next 2 years, we anticipate that all eligible Vi-
etnamese reeducation prisoners — that is, those interned more than
3 years because of their association with the United States — will
have entered the United States.
We also expect within the next 2 years we will need to bring the
Soviet refugee admissions program into conformity with emerging
realities in the Soviet Union, a better rationalization of that pro-
gram. In the future, the United States will continue, though per-
haps on a smaller scale, to resettle our fair share of those refugees
who have no alternative but to be resettled.
IRAQI REFUGEES
I would like to address for a moment the recent expressions of
concern in the Congress and in the press about the resettlement of
Iraqi refugees in the United States, the question raised by Senator
Cohen.
Contrary to some press reports, no one is resettled in the United
States without demonstrating a well-founded fear of persecution.
Many of these Iraqi refugees have credible accounts of torture and
abuse. Many of the Iraqi draftees held little enthusiasm for the war
and fled their country early on, sometimes at the behest of the al-
lied forces. These deserters actively opposed the regime and formed
the core of freedom fighters who refused to participate in the inva-
sion of Kuwait and fought to overthrow Saddam in March of 1991.
Many themselves were members of persecuted ethnic and religious
minorities.
We fully recognize that Members of Congress want to be reas-
sured that our Government will not resettle Iraqi soldiers who took
up arms against our country. We are prepared to explore additional
safeguards to ensure against entry into the United States of those
whose activities might have been inimical to U.S. interests.
However, all available evidence, including a just completed re-
view of several hundred recent cases, indicates that all accepted
applicants were deserving beneficiaries of our humanitarian effort.
I understand that these refugees were vetted in Saudi Arabia by
four different groups, each of them looking to determine whether
or not they were justified for entry into the United States. Those
who failed to meet our rigorous criteria were not admitted for re-
settlement. It is an honorable policy that we are following here, one
that we believe is in full accord with American traditions.
I think it is relevant for me to say that, as I understand it, Sen-
ator Cohen, we sent back to Iraq about 75,000 of the POWs that
might have fit the category that you were talking about. If there
is time, we will be glad to discuss this further, and Ambassador
Zimmermann is highly expert in this field and perhaps can follow
more detailed questions if you have them.
1994 REFUGEE ADMISSIONS
The President's proposal for fiscal year 1994 permits the admis-
sion of 120,000 refugees, as you know, Mr. Chairman, a reduction
of 2,000 from the current fiscal year. I am pleased to report that
as part of this year's consultations, improved high-level coordina-
tion exists between the State Department and the Department of
Health and Human Services so as to ensure that sufficient funds
will be available to cover the costs of the resettlement of all
120,000 refugees, a really important step because it was, I think,
quite undesirable to bring these refugees into the country and then
put them at the mercy of State governments, or at least at the ex-
pense of State governments.
Since 1990, separate regional ceilings, as the committee knows,
have been used for the former Soviet Union and for Eastern Eu-
rope. However, given the crisis in the former Yugoslavia and the
need for maximum flexibility this year, we propose to recombine
these ceilings for fiscal 1994.
We propose that the 120,000 admissions for next year be divided
as follows: East Asia, 45,000; the former Soviet Union and Eastern
Europe, 55,000; Near East and South Asia, 6,000; Africa, 7,000;
Latin America and the Caribbean, 4,000. In addition, we have in-
cluded an unallocated reserve of about 3,000 numbers, up from
1,000 numbers last year. This reserve could, after consultation with
Congress, be used in regions where the allocated numbers prove
during the course of the year to be insufficient.
CHANGES IN THE REFUGEE PROGRAM
In connection with next year's program, I want to note very brief-
ly that we initiated or improved several refugee admission pro-
grams mostly for Haitians and Bosnians. The week after President
Clinton's inauguration, a technical team composed of State Depart-
ment, INS, and congressional staff traveled to Haiti to determine
ways to enhance in-country refugee processing. That effort was in
support of the President's commitment to expand viable alter-
natives to perilous boat departures. Based upon the team's rec-
ommendations, significant improvements to the program were
made.
We doubled processing capacity, streamlined the procedures,
opened two new processing centers, and expanded access to those
Haitians who had been interdicted by the Coast Guard. Our policy
10
toward Haitian immigrants and refugees is under continual review
and we will consult with Congress closely as this situation unfolds.
It is a very dynamic situation, as you know, at the present time.
As I stated earlier, the United States is committed a significant
amount of money and material to help the Bosnians who are dis-
placed within Bosnia or who have become refugees beyond its bor-
ders. We continue to believe that assistance in place should be the
primary focus. However, we also believe that it is necessary to
admit certain groups who have special humanitarian needs or con-
cerns. While we hope there will be a peace agreement that will
allow the Bosnians to return home, we also recognize that with
very little warning this program may have to be expanded further.
Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, the refugee program has enjoyed
broad bipartisan support over the years. This is a great American
tradition of providing refuge to the persecuted. The tradition goes
back to the founding of our Nation and links generations of Ameri-
cans to one another. It reinforces our democratic values and is in-
deed a very important part of our national identity. Under Presi-
dent Clinton's leadership, this very important and noble tradition
will continue.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I will be glad to try to respond,
along with my colleagues, to any questions that you may have.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Limon and the Report to Con-
gress on Proposed Refugee Admissions for Fiscal Year 1994 follow:]
[Editor's Note: Another report, entitled "World Refugee Re-
port," a report submitted to the Congress as part of the consulta-
tions on fiscal year 1994 refugee admissions to the United States,
prepared by the Bureau for Refugee Programs, Department of
State. July 1993, is retained in committee files and may be ob-
tained from the U.S. Department of State.]
Prepared Statement of Lavinia Limon on Behalf of the Office of Refugee
Resettlement Administration for Children and Families, Department of
• Health and Human Services
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, I am pleased to have this oppor-
tunity to present the views of the Department of Health and Human Services in this
consultation on refugee admissions for fiscal year 1994.
As you know, this Administration has proposed authorizing up to 121,000 refugee
admissions in fiscal year 1994, of which 120,000 would be publicly funded and 1,000
would be contingent on private sector funding.
Fiirther, the Administration requested $420 million for fiscal year 1994 in order
to accommodate this proposed ceihng without the need to reduce the duration of the
special programs of refugee cash assistance and refugee medical assistance — known
as RCA and RMA — below the current eligibility period of a refugee's first 8 months
in the U.S. This Administration takes very seriously the domestic component of ref-
ugee resettlement, as indicated by our fiscal year 1994 Budget request. Our request
is an 85 percent increase over that of the Bush Administration for fiscal year 1993,
and is ten percent higher than the enacted fiscal year 1993 amount (despite lower
than expected resettlement numbers). Congress is now completing action on the fis-
cal year 1994 request.
State and local governments, voluntary agencies, refugee mutual assistance asso-
ciations, and other participants have done an excellent job over the years in helping
refugees to become self-supporting and productive members in ovir society. It is im-
portant to note that the majority of refugees who arrived in the United States since
1975 have become employed and self-sufficient, a testimony to refugee resilience and
hard work. Dependence on public assistance for prolonged periods is a problem only
in a few States where large refugee populations have resettled, either initially or
through seconciTv migration. In effeci, refugee resettlement in this country has
worked remarkably weU.
11
Continuing budgetary pressures and changing characteristics of the refugee popu-
lation, however, now require those of us in the refugee resettlement field to step
back and reassess how we have done business. We must examine whether changes
are needed in the refugee program to ensure that appropriate flexibility exists to
respond to shifting circumstances while at the same time providing a stable pro-
gram of assistance and services to refugees to enable timely self-svifficiency.
Over the next several months, the Office of Refugee Resettlement will be meeting
with State and county officials, voluntary agencies, mutual assistance associations,
and others throughout the country to examine the program and its responsiveness
to different populations with differing needs. We are committed to a program for ref-
ugees that wiU maximize program effectiveness at reduced cost. We are convinced
that there is no single approach that will be appropriate in all circumstances, and
will be exploring different approaches. We hope to work with Congress to achieve
an improved program that is able to respond effectively to a changing, and often
unpreoictable, world refugee situation.
That concludes my opening statement, Mr. Chairman. I would be pleased to try
to answer any questions tiiat the Committee may have.
REPORT TO THE CONGRESS
ON
PROPOSED REFUGEE ADMISSIONS
FOR FISCAL YEAR 1994
SUBMITTED WITH THE WORLD REFUGEE REPORT
ON BEHALF OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
TO THE COMMITTEES ON "niE JUDICIARY,
UNITED STATES SENATE AND
UNTTED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
IN FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF
SECnON 207(E)(I)-(7)
OF THE
IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT
The E>epartment of State
The Department of Justice
and
The Department of Health and Human Seivices
September 1993
12
THE REPORT TO THE CONGRESS ON PROPOSED REFUGEE
ADMISSIONS AND ALLOCATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR (FY) 1994 is
submitted in compliance with Section 207(e) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act (INA). Tiie Act requires that before the start of the fiscal year and, to the
extent possible, at least two weeks prior to Consultations on refugee admissions,
members of the Committees on the Judiciary of the Senate and the House of
Representatives be provided with the following information:
(1) A description of the nature of the refugee situation;
(2) A description of the number and allocation of the
refugees to be admitted and an analysis of conditions
within the countries from wliich they came;
(3) A description of the proposed plans for their movement
and resettlement ana the estimated cost of their
movement and resettlement;
(4) An analysis of the anticipated social, economic, and
demograpliic impact of their admission to the United
States;
(5) A description of the extent to which other countries v,dll
admit and assist in the resettlement of such refugees;
(6) An analysis of the impact of the participation of the
United States in the resettlement of sucn refugees on the
foreign policy interests of the United States; and
(7) Such additional information as may be appropriate or
requested by such members.
13
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
FOREWORD
I. PROPOSED REFUGEE ADMISSIONS PROGRAM FOR FY 1994 1
A. OVERVIEW OF U.S. REFUGEE POUCY 1
B. RESETTLEMENT NEEDS INT FY 1994 6
1. Africa 6
2. East Asia 8
3. Latin America and the Caribbean 10
4. Near East and South Asia 12
5. Former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe 14
6. Unallocated Reserve 16
7. Private Sector Initiative 16
n. PROPOSED PLANS FOR MOVEMENT AND RESETTr.EMENT 17
A. ADMISSIONS PROCEDURES 17
1. Eligibility Criteria 17
2. The Worldwide Priorities System 17
3. INS Refugee Processing 19
B. THE RESETTLEMENT PROCESS 21
1. Voluntary Agency Processing 21
2. Overseas Language Training and Cultural Orientation 22
3. Health Services 22
4. Initial Reception and Placement-Data Center 23
5. Transportation 23
6. Ongoing Domestic Resettlement Program 24
CI. DOMESTIC IMPACT OF REFUGEE ADMISSIONS 25
A. DEMOGRAPHIC IMPACT 25
B. GEOGRAlTilC DISTRIBUTION 25
C. SECONDARY MIGRATION 31
D. ECONOMIC IMPACT 31
IV. ESTIMATED COSTS OF REFUGEE PROCF.SSING,
MOVIiMENT AND RESETTLEMENT 33
14
LIST OF TABLES
PAGE
L REFUGEE ADMISSIONS IN FY 1993 AND FY 1994
XL PROPOSAL FOR US. REFUGEE ADMISSIONS IN FY 1994
IIL REFUGEES AND AMERASIANS: - 27
NEW ARRIVALS IN TEN LEADING STATES IN
FY 1991 AND FY 1992
IV. REFUGEES AND AMERASIANS: 28
ARRIVALS FROM ALL COUNTRIES BY STATE IN FY 1992
V. INDOCHINESE REFUGEES: ESTIMATED CUMULATIVE 29
STATE POPULATIONS INCLUDING ENTRIES FROM 1975
THROUGH SEPTEMBER, 1992
VI. NON-INDOCHINESE REFUGEES: ARRIVALS BY STATE 30
DURING FY 1983-92
Vn. ESTIMATED COST OF REFUGEE PROCESSING, MOVEMENT 34
AND RESETTLEMENT, FY 1994 ESTIMATE
15
FOREWORD
The annual Congressional consultations on refugee admissions provide a
unique opportunity for the Congress and the Administration to focus on the
domestic and international implications of the U.S. refugee policy, and mark the
culmination of a many-faceted cor\suItative process for FY 1994.
Administration officials had periodic discussions with Members and staff of
the House and Senate Judiciary Committees, the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee, the House Foreign Affairs Committee, the House and Senate
Appropriations Committees and other interested Congressional committees.
Interagency meetings which included representatives from bureaus of the
Department of State including the Bureau for Refugee Programs and the Bureau
for Human Rights and Humanitarian Affairs, the Department of Justice's
Inronigration and Naturalization Service, the Department of Health and Human
Service's Office of Refugee Resettlement, the Office of Management and Budget,
and the National Security Council were regularly convened. In addition,
consultations were held with representatives of state and local governments,
public interest groups, private voluntary organizations, mutual assistance
associations, and other organizations concerned w^ith refugees.
The Administration is committed to strengthening and implementing the
U.S. refugee admissions and assistance policy consistent with domestic and
international concerns within a humanitarian framework. The task of balancing
these concerns has become increasingly difficult because of growdng numbers of
refugees and constrained budgets. Nevertheless, we continue to admit select
numbers to our country as refugees. At the same time, we contribute to
life-saving assistance programs which impact on millions of the world's refugees
who are not eligible for our admissions program.
This document presents the President's admissions proposals for FY 1994. It
is intended to initiate the Congressional consultations process set out in Section
207 of the Refugee Act of 1980 and to elicit responses from the House and Senate
Judiciary Committees and others interested in refugee policies and programs.
After receiving the views of the Congress, the President will determine refugee
admissions levels and allocations for FY 1994
16
-1-
I. PROPOSED REFUGEE ADMISSIONS PROGRAM FOR FY 1994
A. OVERVIEW OF US. REFUGEE POUCY
In the resolution of refugee problenns, the United States gives highest priority
to the safe, voluntary return of refugees to their homelands. This policy, embodied
in the Refugee Act of 1980, is also the first priority for the United Nations High
Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). If safe, voluntary repatriation is not
feasible, settlement in countries of asylum within the region is sought as the next
preferred alternative. Often, however, political differences, lack of economic
resources to support large numbers of additional people, or ethnic, religious or
other deep-rooted animosities prevent this option from being exercised. Finally,
consideration is given to resettlement in third countries, including the United
States.
The United States considers for admission persons of special humanitarian
concern w^ho can establish persecution or a w^ell-founded fear of persecution on
account of race, religion, nationahty, membership in a particular social group, or
political opinion. The legal basis of the refugee admissions program is the Refugee
Act of 1980 w^hich embodies the American tradition of granting refuge to diverse
groups suffering or fearing persecution. The Act adopted, for the purpose of our
refugee admissions program, the definition of "refugee" contained in the United
Nations Convention and Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees. The definition
w^hich may be found in Section 101 (a) (42) of the Immigration and Nationality Act
(IN A), as amended by the Refugee Act, is as follows:
"The term "refugee" means (A) any person who is outside any country of
such person's nationality or, in the case of a person having no nationality,
is outside any country in w^hich such person last habitually resided, and
who is unable or unwilling to return to, and is unable or unwilling to
avail himself or herself of the protection of, that country because of
persecution or a w^ell-founded fear of persecution on account of race,
religion, nationahty, men:\bership in a particular social group, or political
opinion, or (B) in such circumstances as the President after appropriate
coi^ultation (as defined in section 207 (e) of tiiis Act) may specify, any
person w^ho is within the country of such person's nationality or, in the
case of a person having no nationality, within the country in which such
person is habitually residing, and w^ho is persecuted or who has a
well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality,
membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. The term
"refugee" does not include any person who ordered, incited, assisted, or
otherwise participated in the persecution of any person on account of
race, religion, nationality, memberslaip in a particular social group, or
political opinion."
17
The estimated world population of refugees and externally displaced persons
is over 17 million; persons displaced within their own countries by war, famine
and civil unrest may equal that number. The United Stales works with other
governments, and international and private organizations to protect refugees and
displaced persons and strives to ensure that survival needs for food, health care
ancl shelter are met. Under the authority contained in the Migration and Refugee
Assistance Act of 1962, as amended, the United States contributes to the -
international activities of the UNHCR, the International Committee of the Red
Cross (ICRC) and other international and private organizations which orovide
ongoing relief and assistance for refugees and displaced persons. The United
States has been instrumental in mobilizing a community of nations to work
through these and other organizations in alleviating the misery and suffering of
refugees throughout the world.
The United States, aware that more than 75 percent of the world's refugees are
women and young children, recognizes the special needs of these vulnerable
groups, particularly in the areas of protection and assistance. The United States
supports the UNHCR and other relevant international, goverrunental and
non-goverrunental orgaruzations in their efforts to involve refugee women in
implementing programs on their own behalf, and also supports the assigning of
women officers to positions where they can impact favorably on the protection and
well-being of v/omen and children refugees.
We continue to press for the most effective use of international resources
directed to the urgent needs of refugees and displaced persons. During FY 1993,
the Uiuted States supported major relief programs in Africa, Central America,
Southeast Asia, South Asia and the Near East, including the Gulf region.
Contributions for these funds were made through organizations including the
UNHCR, the United Nations World Food Program (WFP), the ICRC, the United
Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), and the United Nations Relief and Works
Agency for Palestine Rehagees (UNRWA). This support averted further human
tragedy and helped sustain life by providing food and other assistance to meet the
basic human needs of refugees. Details are provided in the World Refugee Rep>ort.
With regard to refugees resettled in the United States, the U.S. Government
aims to promote economic self-sufficiencv as quickly as possible, Umiting the need
for public assistance and encouraging refugees to contribute to the diversity and
enrichment of our country as previous newcomers have done. To this end,
short-term English language and cultural orientation programs for certain groups
of refugees have been estabhshed overseas to initiate the process of adapting to our
complex society. Particular attention is paid to the health of refugees to ensure
that communicable diseases are controlled before entry into the United States.
Federally funded programs administered by the States have provided cash and
medical assistance, training programs, employment and other support services to
many refugees soon after arrival in the United States. A variety of institutional
providers have performed these services, including private voluntary agencies
who also perform initial reception and placement services under cooperative
agreements with the Department of State. All of these benefits are intended for
snort-term utilization during a refugee's transition to an independent, contributing
member of the national economy and of American society.
18
-3-
TABLE I
REFUGEE ADMISSIONS EM FY 1992 AND FY 1993
REGION
ESTIMATED
FY 1993 TOTAL
FY 1992 FY 1993 ARRIVALS FY 1993
ACTUAL CEILING THRU 7/93 ANTLdP.
Africa
East Asia
Eastern Europe
Latin America/
Caribbean
Near East/South Asia
Former Soviet Union
Former Soviet Union/
Eastern Europe*
UNALLOCATED
RESERVE
5,491
7,000
3,831
7,000
51,848
51,000 ++
42380
51,000
2,886
2,725 ++
1,474
2,725
2,924
4,500***
3,252
4,500
6,844
7,000
5,886
7,000
61,298
49,775 ++
40,451
49,775
PSI
TOTALS
853
132,144
10,000
132,000
251
97,525
500
122,500
*Former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe
ceilings are being combined in FY-94.
**1,000 numbers allocated to Near East/South Asia in FY-92.
***1,000 numbers allocated to Latin America/Caribbean in FY-93.
++ 1,000 numbers in original ceiling reallocated from East Asia to
Eastern Europe. 225 numbers in original ceiling reallocated from
Former Soviet Union to Eastern Europe.
19
-4-
The President proposes to respond to the humanitarian needs of
refugees by establishing for FY 1994 an admissions ceiling of 121,000
refugees for permanent resettlement in the United States. Proposed
allocations witliin tliis ceiling are shown in Table n below:
TABLE n
PROPOSAL FOR US. REFUGEE ADMISSIONS IN FY 1994
ARF-A OF ORIGIN
PROPOSED
CEILING
Africa
7,000
F^st Asia
45,000 *
Former Soviet Union/Eastern Europe
55,000
Latin America and the Caribbean
4,000
Near East and South Asia
6,000
Unallocated Reserve
3,000
.SUT5 -TOTAL
IZOQQQ
Private Sector Programs 1,000
TOTAL lU .QW
* This figure includes Amerasians and their family members who enter as
immigrants under a special statutory provision but receive the same benefits as
refugees.
20
The President also proposes to specify that special circumstances exist so that,
for the purpose of admission under the limits established above and pursuant to
section 101(a)(42)(B) of the INA, certain persons, if they otherwise quahfy for
admission, may be considered as refugees of special humanitarian concern to the
United States even though they are still withm their countries of nationality or
habitual residence. The proposed designations for FY 1994 are persor\s in Cuba,
Haiti, Vietnam and the former Soviet Union.
In addition to the proposed admission of refugees from abroad, the
Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) will be authorized to adjust to the
status of permanent resident alien 10,000 persons who have been granted asylum
in the United States and have been in the United States for at least one year,
pursuant to Section 209 (b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
In the regional descriptions which follow, an overview of refugee-generating
conditions is provided. In addition, voluntary repatriation, resettlement writhin the
region, and third-country resettlement opportunities are mentioned. There is also
reference to refugee resettlement by countries other than the United States. More
detailed information and statistics on these subjects are found in the companion
World Refugee Report.
21
D. RESETTI.EMENT TJEEDS IN FY 1994
1. AFRICA
The countries of Africa provide refuge lo some six million refugees. Neighboring
countries experiencing civil unrest often riouse each other's citizens: there are
Ethiopian refugees in Sudan and Sudanese refugees in Ethiopia; Rwandan refugees in
Burundi and Burundi refugees in Rwanda; Liberian refugees in Sierra Leone and Sierra
Leonean refugees in Liberia; Mauritanian refugees in Mali and Malian refugees in
Mauritania; and so on. These refugees often place a burden upon fragile
infrastructures. An extensive drought in southern Africa in 1992 placed an even
greater strain on the countries of Malawi, Zambia and Zimbabwe which together host
almost one and a half million refugees, mostly Mozambican.
In 1992, the most notable change in refugee populatior\s in Africa was the dramatic
outflow of Somalis into Kenya. Renewed fignting in Liberia in October 1992 reversed
prospects for return of Liberian refugees from the Cote dTvoire. Anarchy in eastern
Sierra Leone caused an additional 80,000 to cross the border to Liberia, while continued
war in southern Sudan resulted in 70,000 fleeing to neighboring countries. Political
turmoil in Zaire led to 15,000 crossing the border to Uganda. The fragile peace accord
in Angola v^^hich had resulted in spontaneous repatriation of some 100,000 Angolans
from Zaire was broken in late 1992, halting a UNCHR-led repatriation process
Voluntary Repatriation
On the positive side, the presence of U.N. forces in Somalia to protect food
deliveries has resulted in such a measure of security in some areas that UNHCR has
resulted in the repatriation in 1993 of the rural nomadic Somalis now in camps in
northern Kenya. Peace negotiations between the warring factions in Mozambique ]\ave
enabled UNHCR to plan for nnassive voluntary repatriation in the coming year. Plans
are also being made for repatriation of refugees in Sudan to Ethiopia and Eritrea.
Resettlement v^rithin the Region
The generosity of the African people and governments in granting extended refuge
to neighbors in distress has continued despite growing social and economic burder^ on
these developing nations. In view of the status of refugee populations in Africa, still
greater international efforts in enhancing self-sufficiency of refugee groups are needed.
Third-Country ResclUemcnl
Despite the usually generous asylum policies found witl\in Africa, there are
refugees who require resettlement outside the region They are, generally, either
political dissidents who are not welcome in neighboring countries, or urban refugees
not easily assimilated into the predominantly rural economies of countries of asylum,
or vulnerable refugees identified by UNHCR as needing permanent resettlement.
UNHCR has predicted a need for third-country resettlement for 10,730 African refugees
in 1993. Most of these refugees are likely to be resettled in the United Stales and
Canada, with smaller numbers going to Australia, Scandinavia and Western Europe
22
us Admissions
Proposed Ceiling The proposed ceiling for Africa is 7,000 - the same ceiling as
authorized for FY 1993.
Regarding FY 1993, a penultimale group of approximately 1,500 Ethiopian
refugees will arrive from the Sudan tliis year. In Kenya, the Joint Voluntary Agency
(JV/0 doubled its staff tliis year to allow processing in camps outside of Nairobi, which
should result in 4,500 admissions of (mainly) SomzUis and some Ethiopians. The JVA in
Sierra Leone is processing for admission about 750 Liberians in FY 1993. Admission of
about 250 Africans of other nationalities from Nairobi and other processing posts
around the world is anticipated.
The refugee processing situation in Africa in FY 1994 will change somewhat. Most
of the Ethiopian refugees accepted by the United States will have traveled to the United
States in FY 1993, leaving only about 500 to be adnnitted in early FY 1994. All known
eligible Liberians under the current program will have been interviewed and most
admitted to the United States in FY 1993, with only about 200 remaining to be admitted
in FY 1994. With the processing of these caseloads nearly completed, the JVA's in both
Khartoum and Freetown are scneduled to close at the end of FY 1993 The anticipated
phase-out of the above two programs is anticipated to be offset by resettlement needs
for refugees from SomaUa, Sudan and Zaire. In FY 1994 the Department of State
estimates a need for 4,500 admission numbers for Somalis and 2,500 for other
nationalities, requiring a ceiling of 7,000.
Proposed designated nationalities for FY 1994 are: Liberians, Somalis, Sudanese
and Zairians. UNHCR-led repatriation programs for Ethiopians/Eritreans and
Mozambicans, coupled wdth a paucity of applications from Mozambicans, suggest that
the removal of these nationalities from the list of designated nationalities for FY 1994 is
appropriate. Liberians would remain a designated nationality and applications will be
handled on a case-by-case basis through UNHCR after the closure of^the JVA in West
Africa. Liberian processing would continue to be limited to Priorities One through
Three to provide resettlemient opportunities to those in imminent danger and those
who have worked for the United States government, and to reunite immediate
families
In light of the volatile political and etlxnic circumistances in many African
countries, processing posts in Africa are authorized to process, without prior
Washington approval, nationals of any African country referred to the United States
program by UNHCR (except for Ethiopians and Eritreans, who require Washington
approval prior to processing). We propose to maintain this practice Additionally, the
United States is a participant in a special UNHCR program to resettle vulnerable
refugees, particularly those with security, medical oi psychological problems We
approved approximately 50 cases in F^' 1993 and expect a similar number in FY 1994
Most of these cases have been of African nationality, notably Somali
Proposed processing priorities for Africans are as follows: Liberiai-is would be
processed only in Priorities One through Three. Somalis would be processed
worldwide in Priorities One through Five. Sudanese and Zairian applicants applying
at African posts are eligible in all six priorities. At non-African posts, only those
applicants in Priorities One through Fi
to July 1, 1988 have been considered and this would continue in l-T 1994
applicants in Priorities One through Five who arrived in their countiy of asylum prior
23
2. liAST ASIA
I'LTSl Asylum
There are still over 110,000 Indochinese asylum seekers in first asylum camps m
Southeast Asia and Hong Kong, including almost 80,000 Vietnamese and about 35,000
Lao (mostly Hmong). ThaUand also hosts over 70,000 Burmese ethmc minorities and
students in encampments alone its border with Burma, as well as about 2,500 Burmese
student/dissidents in the Bangkok area recognized by UNHCR as "persons of concern."
The past year has been marked by a continued drop in boat arrivals in the
Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries. From January through
June 1993 there were only 23 arrivals in Southeast Asian countries (Indonesia) and 32 in
Hong Kong. While the pace of new arrivals in FY-1993 slightly exceeds that of Fi'-1992,
when a total of only 58 Vietnamese arrived in all first asylum countries, the number of
arrivals remains negligible when compared to the more than 20,000 boat people who
arrived in 1991.
Vietnamese and Lao asylum seekers are processed under the provisions of the
Comprehensive Plan of Action (CPA) adopted by over 50 nations at the International
Conference on Indochinese Refugees (ICIR) in Geneva in June 1989. The CPA reaffirms
both the practice of first asylum and international commitments to generous
resettlement policies. The CPA calls for tlie expansion of legal emigration and
institutes a screening program to identify bonafide Vietnamese refugees. With the
exception of Malaysia ana Singapore, the right of boat people to arrive on shore and
seek asylum is recognized by tne Southeast Asian nations and Hong Kong.
In Thailand, the 370,000 displaced Khmer previously encamped along the
Thai-Cambodian border have all been repatriated to the interior of Cambodia in a
UNHCR-orchestrated operation begun in March 1992. As of June 1993, only 218
remained in a refugee processing center in Thailand awaiting final processing for
United States immigrant visas or parole. In addition, there were 548 "boat" Kiimer in a
rcmp in Indonesia. However, since Cambodia is not part of the CPA, resettlement
countries generally have not been granted access to Cambodians who arrived by boat
in Indonesia or Malaysia.
Voluntary Refwtrialion
Under the terms of the CPA, asylum seekers who do not have valid refugee claims
Will not be processed for third-country resettlement. Instead, they are encouraged to
return voluntarily to Vietnam under a UNHCR program. As of June 30, 1993, more
th.an 30,000 persons had voluntarily returned to Vietnam from Hong Kong and almost
13,000 persons had voluntarily returned from the first asylum camps in ASEAN
countries. Voluntary returnees are monitored by the UNHCR in Vietnam
Since September 1980, a UNHCR vokinlary repatriation program has existed lo
facilitate the return of ethnic Lao, Hmong, and other liighlanders to Laos from
Thailand More than 14,000 persons have returned since the inception of the program,
with 3,000 repatriating in 1992 Tiiere are several reception centers for returnees in
Laos, and UNHCR monitors the returnees to eiisure their safely
24
-9-
RcsclUcmcnt in tiic Region
In East Asia, willingness to settle Indochinese refugees or even to grant temporary
asylum is constrained by security and economic concerns, as well as cultural, religious,
and political sensitivities. At the ICIR, the ASEAN states made it clear that they
expected all Vietnamese asylum seekers either to be resettled in third countries outside
the region or to return to Vietnam.
Third-Counby Resettlement
Under the CPA, resettlement countries agreed to resettle, over a three-year period,
all Vietnamese asylum seekers who arrived in countries of first asylum prior to a
specific cutoff date (mid-March 1989 for Southeast Asia and mid-June 1988 for Hong
Kong). Over 99 percent of these roughly 50,000 pre-cutoff date persor^ have already
been resettled or have been approved for resettlement. The United States also agreed
to resettle up to 50 percent oftne screened-in cases in the region and has been
processing these cases. Unaccompanied minors in the post-cutoff date population are
being reviewed by special committees in each first asylum country which determine
what is in the best interest of each child in terms of resettlement or return.
US. Admissions
Proposed East Asia Ceiling. The proposed admissions ceiling for East Asia for F^
1994 is 45,000.
In FY 1993 there was one admissions ceilin? for East Asia for both first asylum and
Orderly Departure Program cases wl\ich totalea 52,000. However, in March 1993 this
wcis reduced by 1,000, to 51,000, through the reallocation of unneeded numbers to
provide resettlement admissions numbers for the newly established Bosnian
admissions program. We anticipate that approximately 12,000 first asylum refugees
and 39,000 ODP refugees (including 11,000 Amerasians) uall be admitted from East
Asia by the end of FY 1993.
For FY 1994, the first asylum and ODP ceilings will again be combined for a single
East Asia ceiling of 45,000. Within this combined ceiUng, priority will continue to be
given to meeting United States commitments to accept first asylum refugees under the
CPA. First asylum admissions needs are expected to be about 9,000, of which up to
7,000 would be for Hmong from the camps m Thailand and the remainine 2,000 for
Vietnamese and Burmese. Moreover, there will be enough flexibility in the overall East
Asia ceiling to accommodate unexpected fluctuations in the need for resettlement
among these groups. With the expected resettlement in FY 1994 of the relatively small
residual number of Vietnamese refugees from the first asylum camps in Southeast
Asian countries and Hong Kong who have been screeneci in under the CPA, our
processing of the Vietnamese first asylum caseload should be virtually complete.
Orderly Departure Program (ODP)
The total estimated refugee adnaissions for FY 1994 under ODP is 36,000 - about
30,500 former detainees, 3,500 Amerasians, and 2,000 others.
Released Reeducation Detainees Program. The United States remains firmly
committed to the release and resettlement of those who have been detained in
"reeducation centers" in Vietnam because of their association with the United
25
-10-
Slalcs oi the former South Vielnainese Government An agreenienl cicnling a program
for United Stales resetllenienl of released detainees was successfully ncgotiatea in July
1989 and implemented m October 1989. By the end of FY-1993, almost 79,000 former
detainees (iricluding family members) will have been admitted since the inception of
the program. Plaiis are to admit 30,500 persoi\s during FY-1994.
AmeiBsLan Program. The Amerasian immigrant program is an integral part of the
ODP. The United States plans to provide resettlement opportunities for all Amerasians
in Vietnam along with their close family members who wish to come here. Amerasians
are processed for resettlement under a separate bilateral program with procedures
similar to that of the regular ODP. Legislation passed in December 1987 designated a
special class of Amerasian immigrant. To date, more than 82,000 Amerasians and
accompanying family members have been admitted into the United States. ODP
admissions in FY 1993 will include 11,000 Amerasian immigrants and accompanying
family members, who are admitted as imn\igrants but are included in the refugee
admissions ceiling for consistency with the budgetary process. Large-scale processing
of the Amerasian caseload was completed in 1993, although registration ancf processing
of additional qualified applicants will continue indefinitely.
Designated Nationalities. In FY 1993, Vietnamese, Lao, and Burmese are
designated nationalities of particular concern to the United States Under the CPA,
Vietnamese in first asylum countries who are screened in are processed in Priorities
One through Five. Lao are processed in Priorities One through Five. In addition, the
United States is processing certain qualified Burmese students/dissidents in Priorities
One through Six who are referred by UNHCR, arrived in Thailand between March 15,
1988 and May 1, 1992, and have a well-founded fear of persecution due to
pro-democracy activities in Burma. Consideration of these nationalities for refugee
admission is authorized without referral of specific cases to Washington. On a
case-by-case basis, other nationalities, such as Cltinese, will continue to be processed
with prior approval from the Department of State and INS headquarters in
Waslungton. While the special humaiiitarian parole/imnrugrant visa program for
border Khmer in Thailand ended in FY-1992, Cambodians with current immigrant visa
petitions can apply for their visas at the consular section of the United States Mission in
Phnom Penh.
3. LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN
Voluntary Repatriation
The installation of stable and democratically elected governments, the difficulties
of life in refugee camps and regional peace efforts have reduced to a trickle tlie number
of persons fleeing their home countries and have spurred voluntary repatriations of
refugees in the region In October 1992, agreement was reached for the orderly return,
under UNHCR auspices, of 43,000 Guatemalan refugees living in Mexico. In El
Salvador, the signing of peace accords in January 1992 permitted over 4.800 refugees to
return voluntarily that year, while virtually eliminating new outflows Furtlicr, Dy
mid-1992, most recognized Nicaraguan refugees had retxirned home
Resettlement u\ U\c Region
Most host governments do not encourage ]iernianent resettlement, laigely because
ol their own depressed economic situations Hthnic and national nvaiiics also make
26
-n-
local resettlement difficult. However, various Central American governments, as well
as the Mexican government, have demonstrated the forbearance necessary to make first
asylum protection work. The region has been moving away from housing displaced
persons in refugee camps towards local integration with greater refugee
self-sufficiency. Several countries in the region offered asylum to limited numbers of
Haitians who had fled Haiti by boat. However, most of these individuals chose to
return to Haiti.
Tlurd-Country Reseltlement
While third-country resettlement has not been the preferred option for most
Central American refugees, it has been the predominant solution for the Cubans fleeing
repression by the Castro regime. Since the revolution in 1959, over one million Cubans
have fled that country. The vast majority have resettled in the United States, but
Venezuela, Peru, Spain, and to a lesser extent, other countries of Latin America and
Western Europe have been quite generous in granting temporary or permanent asylum
to Cuban refugees.
UNHCR does not generally refer Central American refugee cases for third-country
resettlement, believing that most will eventually be able to repatriate, as is currently
occurring, or will resettle within the region.
U-S. Admissions
FY 1993. We anticipate that close to 3,000 Cubans and 1,300 Haitians will be
admitted under this ceiling during FY 1993. With the doubling of the processing
capacity, the establishment of two processing centers outside of Port-au-Prince, and our
goal of processing expeditiously all likely targets of persecution, the number of
approved Haitian refugees admitted clearly will exceed the 1993 estimated total of 500
by several hundred. Thus, after consulting with Congress, it was determined that the
use of the 1,000 unallocated reserve was warranted for Haitian refugees.
Proposed FY 1994 Ceiling. For FY 1994 the adnussions ceiling proposed for Latin
America and the Caribbean is 4,000 persons, up from the FY 1993 ceiling of 3,500. The
proposed FY 1994 admissions numbers will be available for processing of Cubans and
Haitians.
Haitian Adnvissions. In February 1992, an in-countr)' refugee processing program
was established in Haiti. It expanded significantly in June 1992 following the Executive
Order permitting the interdiction and direct repatriation of Haitians attempting to
reach the Unitecf States illegally by boat. A further expansion of the program occurred
in January 1993 when refugee processing capacity was doubled and, again in the spring
when regional processing centers were opened in Les Cayes and Cap Haitien.
Althougli any Haitian may apply for refugee status through the in-country program,
priority for processing is given to those persons who are likely targets of persecution,
such as former political prisoners, those who hold or held leaderslijp positions in
political human rights or religious organizations, held sensitive positions in the
Aristide government, or are prominent in fields that may be targetted In third
countries, processing of Haitians is limited to Priority One.
Cuban Adnussions. Under the bilateral Migration Agreement bet-ween the United
States and Cuba, the United States has agreed to accept up to 3,000 refugees from Cuba
each year. The Cuban admissions program was originally designed for former
long-term political prisoners. However, by 1991 the resettlement needs of this
population had largely been addressed, and eligibility requirements were expanded.
27
-12-
In FY 1993, Ihe admiss'toiis program focused on specific groups identified as being of
compelling concern to the United States. This focus will be continued in FY 1994.
These specific eligible groups are: (1) former political prisoners; (2) members of
persecuted religious minorities; (3) human rights activists; (4) forced labor conscripts
during the period 1965-1968; and, (5) persons deprived of their professional credentials
or subjected to other disproportionately harsh or discriminatory treatment resulting
from tneir perceived or actual political or religious beliefs or activities, dissidents and
other refugees of compelling concern to the United States. In third countries, funded
priority one Cubans may be processed if they fled Cuba before November 20, 1987.
DcsigTialed Naliorxalilics. In FY 1993, Cubans, Haitians, El Salvadorans and
Guatemalans were designated nationalities and authorized in-country processing. In
FY 1994, Cubans and Haitians continue to be designated nationalities and authorized
for in-country processing.
4. NEAR EAST AND SOUTH ASIA
Almost nine million refugees and displaced persons reside in the countries of
North Africa, the Near East and South Asia, iiicluding three and a half million Afghans
and nearly three million Palestinians. This is a decline of nearly three million refugees
(mostly Afghans) since December 1991. On the down side, however, 1992 saw new
outflows into the region, notably over 200,000 Burmese into Bangladesh, some 70,000
Tajikistanis into Afghanistan, about 70,000 Bhutanese into Nepal, and 80,000 Somalis
into Egypt, Yemen and the United Arab Emirates. Other sizeable populations
(Sahv^aris in Algeria, Sri Lankan Tamils in India, Iraqis in Iran ana Saudi Arabia, and
Palestinians in Israel, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria) have remained fairly stable.
VolunLary Kepalrialion
In the early fall of 1992 UNHCR organized a successful repatriation into the
northern Iraq security zone of nearly 18,000 Iraqi Kurds in Turkey who had fled the
chemical attacks in 1988. Many Iraqi refugees from the Gulf Wai previously in Turkey,
Jordan and other countries bordering Iraq left countries of first asylum m 1992, either
resettling in third countries or returning to Iraq. The 250,000 persons who fled to Saudi
Arabia as a result of the Gulf War also either returned to their countries of origin or
moved on, leaving only 28,000 Shi'ite civilians and former Iraqi soldiers in a refugee
camp. Unfortunately, the voluntary repatriation of about one million Afghans in mid
to late 1992 which began after the fall of the Najibullah regime slowed to a trickle as
fighting in Kabul between rival mujahedin groups continued throughout the year.
Under a joint Indo-Lankan plan, approximately 30,000 Sri Lankan Tamils returned to
Sri Lanka, where UNHCR providea assistance.
Resettlement in the Reg;ion
Few countries within the region are willing to offer permanent resettlement to
refugees from neighboring countries, but many have been generous with long-term
asvlum. Over the years, Pakistan and Iran have offered asylum to over four million
Aighans who are permitted to engage in many economic activities and are not
restricted to their camps Several countries in the Near East have extended work
permits to Palestinian, Iranian and Afghan refugees and displaced persons for long
periods of time. Most of the Iraqis in Turkey are permitted to remain without threat of
deportation. However, many live under difficult conditioiis and aie unable to obtain
28
-13-
permanenl residence. Saudi Arabia does not intend to provide permanent resettlement
to Iraqis presently residmg within its territory. Iranians appear to have the most
difficulty in obtaming resident status in countries of first asylum or other countries in
the region.
Tlurd-Counlry ResclHement
While third-country resettlement is not the preferred solution in most cases, it is
the only option for certain refugees at risk in countries of first asylum. UNHCR
coixsiders Iraqis in Saudi Arabia and Kuw^ait to be particularly at risk, in addition to
non-mandate refugees in Jordan, Lebanon, Cyprus and India. UNHCR has predicted a
need for third-country resettlement for 11,785 Near Eastern refugees in 1993, plus an
additional 18,000 slots in future years for the Iraqi refugees in Saudi Arabia. Many of
these refugees are likely to be resettled in the United States, with sizeable numbers also
going to Scandinavia, Canada, Australia and Western Europe.
JJS. Admissions
Proposed Ceiling. The proposed FY 1994 admission ceiling for the Near East is
6,000, down from the 7,000 ceiling for FY 1993.
The Afghan admissions program, for which interviews were completed in FY 1992,
will see the last 1,200 arrivals in FY 1993. Approvals of Iranian refugees have declined
slightly tliis fiscal year, so that we expect about 1,200 Iranian admissions in FY 1993.
The resettlement of Iraqi Kurds who fled chenaical attacks by the Baghdad government
in 1988 was largely completed in FY 1992. 1300 Iraqi refugees from the 1990-91 Gulf
War are being resettled m the United States in FY 1993 from Turkey. 2,000 Iraqis in
Saudi Arabia have been approved and are being readied for departure. In addition,
there is a considerable number of applications from Iraqis at processing posts in
Europe, with about 1^00 persons expected to be admitted in FY 1993. We thus expect
to fully utilize the 7,000 Near East/South Asia ceiling for FY 1993.
minorities)
in Turkey is nearly complete, with UNHCR having arranged
repatriation of nearly all Iraqis in camps in Turkey during FY 1993. We expect perhaps
500 more Iraqi admissions from Turkey in FY 1994. There are still 28,000 Iraqis in
refugee camps in Saudi Arabia, and we plan to participate in a UNHCR-led
multi-country resettlement effort by admitting up to 3,000 of them in FY 1994.
Applications from Iraqis in Europe should continue in FY 1994, with numbers
estimated at 1,000 admissions. We, therefore, anticipate a need for 6,000 numbers for
refugees from the Near East/South Asian region in FY 1994
Designated nationahtaes for FY 1994 are Iranians and Iraqis. On a case-by-case
basis, nationals of other countries may be processed with prior approval from
Washington. Iraqis may be processed in priorities one through five and Iranians in
priorities one through four (including the expanded definition of priority four).
29
-14-
5. FORMEl^ SOVIET UNION AND liASieUsl EUl^OPn
Since 1990, separate regional ceilings iiave been used for the former Soviet Uiiion
and for Eastern Europe. However, given the dramatic humanitarian crisis in the former
Yugoslavia and the need for maximum flexibility in refugee admissions processing for
Dosmans, we propose to recombine these two ceiUngs for FY 1994.
Former Soviet Union
Witliin the past year, the 15 republics of the former Soviet Union have continued to
wrestle with the difficult process of political and economic reform. Although the new
republics have pledged to ensure freedom of emigration, and some steps have been
talcen in tliis direction, full freedom of emigration has not yet been achieved.
Rising nationalism and etlinic tension continue to contribute to an unstable
situation mr ethnic and religious minorities in certain republics of the former Soviet
Union. Violent ethnic conflicts have flared up in several of the republics, particularly
Tajikistan, Georgia, and Azerbaijan. Some ethnic groups wliich had dispersed
H\roughout the former Soviet Union are now seeking to return to their traditional
homelands. Other persons seek to migrate within and betw^een republics in response to
political instability and difficult economic conditions.
Eastern Europe
In many countries in Western Europe tl\e proportion of asylum-seekers coming
from Eastern Europe has decreased as democratic reforms have taken hold. Notable
exceptions to this trend were persons fleeing conflicts in the former Yugoslavia and
Romaruar\s seeking economic opportunity. Both of these groups constituted large
portions of the asylum-seeking populations in nearly every country of Western
Europe. Large numbers of Albanians seeking economic opporluiiities also remain in
some European countries. Most other Eastern European asylum-seekers, however, are
now found ineligible for refugee status since they can return to their homes without
fear of persecution. Several countries are contemplating large-scale repatriation efforts
linked to economic development projects in the home countries and assurances from
governments that repatriates will not be persecuted. Germany has already concluded
an agreement with Romania to permit the repatriation of thousands of Romanians
determined to be economic rrugrants.
Third-Country Resettlement
In addition to the United States and Western Europe, Australia and Canada have
resettled Eastern Europeans, and Israel has resettled Soviet Jews. Between FY 1975 and
I^ 1992, nearly 115,000 refugees from Eastern Europe, and 320,000 refugees from the
former Soviet Union, resettled in the United States.
U.S. Admissions
FY 1993. In FY 1993, the admissions ceiling for the former Soviet Union was sol at
50,000 and the ceiling for Eastern Europe at 1,500. The Eastern Europe ceiling
subsequently was raised to 3,500 through the reallocation of 1,000 numbers from the
former Soviet Union program and 1,000 from the East Asian ceiling, to allow for the
establishment of a Bosiiian refugee admissions program 11 subsequently became clem
79-707 0-94-2
30
-15-
Ihal nol all of the additional numbers would be used in Eastern Eurm^e, so 775 numbers
have been returned to the Soviet ceiling. As of July 31, 1993, 40,451 Soviets and 1,474
persons from Eastern Europe had been admitted to the United Slates as refugees.
Proposed FY 1994 Ceiling. The proposed ceiling for FY 1994 for the former Soviet
Union and Eastern Europe is 55,000.
Former Soviet Union Admissions: The admission numbers for the former Soviet
Union will continue to be used by groups identified in the Lautenberg Amendment;
i.e., Jews, Evangelical Cliristians, Ukrainian Catholics and Orthodox, as well as other
individuals of concern - particularly refuseniks. The vast majority of Soviet refugees
now interviewed have family ties to the United States.
There are currently some 85,000 applications on file which meet our Soviet
program's eligibility criteria and are awaiting scheduling. Approximately 5,000
interviews per month are scheduled. The rate of new applications received now
averages 5,000-8,000 per month, of which approximately 25% meet the program's
eligibility criteria.
Eastern Europe Admissions. Democratic changes in Eastern Europe have
narrowed this program significantly. During FY 1993, only Bosnians have been eligible
to apply for the U.S. refugee program. Continued fighting in the former Yugoslavia,
and in Bosnia-Herzegovina in particular, will continue to generate refugees in need of
resettlement in the United States. Persons from Bosnia-Herzegovina of special
humanitarian concern to the United States, and therefore eligible to submit refugee
applications, are: (1) vulnerable Bosnian Muslims referred for resettlement by llNHCR,
such as former detainees, torture victims, and women victims of violence, as well as
others; (2) Bosnian Muslim relatives of United States citizens, lawful permanent
resident, asylees and refugees; and, (3) parents and siblings of minor United States
citizen children who have been displaced as a result of the fighting in
Bosrua-Herzegovina. On a case-by-case basis, non-Muslim vulnerables referred by
UNHCR can be considered. As developments in the former Yugoslavia unfold,
adjustments in these processing criteria are likely to be necessary.
The United States goal remains to encourage conditions in Bosnia-Herzegovina
that wrill ultimately permit large-scale repatriation. Nonetheless, even with substantial
return to Bosnia, conditions in the region may ultimately require additional
resettlement efforts. This, combined with ennanced Umted States efforts to identify
individuals of special humanitarian concern under current processing priorities, may
require increased United States resettlement numbers. Therefore, in FY 1994 we are
structuring the program as flexibly as possible to allow for expanded refugee
admissions for Bosnians.* We also anticipate a small number of admission of Eastern
European Visas 93 recipients (i.e., spouses and children of previously admitted
refugees), who will be primarily from Albania and Romania.
Designated Nationalities. For FY 1994, eligible persons who were nationals of the
former Soviet Union prior to September 2, 1991, ancf nationals
* Under admission program priorities, the Administration is prepared to allocate up to
10,000 resettlement numbers for this purpose If allocation of these numbers or higner
numbers is considered from outside the regional ceiling, the Department of State will
consult Vi'ith Congress
31
-16-
of Dosuia-Herzegovin^ will be designaled for refugee admission The former Soviel
Union will be designated for in-countiy processing.
6. UNALLOCATED RESERVE
In designing the FY 1993 admissions program, the Administration included an
unallocateareserve of 1,000 numbers which could be used for refugees anywhere in the
world. We are using the nunnbers under this ceiling for the admission of Haitians.
Given the current uncertainties surrounding refugee situatior^s and resettlement needs
in many locations (e.g., Bosnia-Herzegovina and Haiti), as well as the desirability of
maintaining sufficient flexibility to react to emergencies, we propose increasing this
unallocated reserve in FY 1994 to 3,000 numbers.
7. PTRIV ATE SECTOR rNTIIATrVE (PSI)
The PSI is a joint private and public venture in w^hich the basic costs of admitting
and resettUng refugees are paid for by the private sector. Since the first proposal under
tltis program was approvea in 1988, the vast majority of refugees admitted under PSI
have been Cuban. In FY 1992 some 853 PSI refugees were admitted and we anticipate
approximately 400 in FY 1993. We are proposing an FY 1994 PSI ceiling of 1,000.
32
-17-
n. PROPOSED FLANS FOR MOVEMENT AND RESETTLEMENT
A. ADMISSIONS PROCEDURES
1. Eligibility Criteria
Applicants for refugee admission into the United States must meet all of the
following criteria-
The applicant must meet tlie definition of a refugee contained in the
Immigration and Nationality Act;
The applicant must be among those refugees determined by the President
to be of special humanitarian concern to the United States;
— The applicant must be otherwise admissible under United States law; and
The applicant must not be firmly resettled in any foreign country.
Aitliough a refugee may meet the above criteria, the existence of the U.S.
refugee admissionsprogram does not create any entitlement for that person to enter
the United States. Tlie admissions program is a legal mechanism for admitting a
refugee when the apphcant is among those persons of particular interest to the
United States.
With respect to persons applying overseas for admission to the United States as
refugees, an initial review is performed to evaluate cases based on US. national
interests, the refugees' situation in temporary asylum, the conditions from which
they have fled, and other humanitzirian considerations. Applicants who meet the
criteria specified above and who fall within the priorities established for the
relevant nationality or region, are presented to tne INS for determination of
eligibility for admission under Section 101(a)(42) of the INA.
2. The Worldwide Priorities System
The worldwide priorities system sets guidelines for the orderly management of
refugee admissions into the United States within the established annua! regional
ceilings.
The issue of whether a person is a refugee under US. law, and the priority to
which a refugee should be assigned for resettlement are separate and distinct
Assignment to a particular priority does not make that individual either more or
less a refugee although it may reflect an assessment of the urgency of the need for
resettlement. Indeed, lefugees could well be qualified for the resettlement program
of another country. Just as qualifying for refugee status does not confer a right to
resettlement in the United States, assignment to a particular priority does not entitle
a person to acceptance into the United States refugee program
33
-18-
The U.S. refugee priorities system sets guidelines for the orderly management
of refugee admissions into the United Slates within the established annual regional
ceilings and is subject to change during the fiscal year.
Refugee Processing Priorities - FY 1 993
Priority One. Compelling concern/ interest: exceptional cases of (a) refugees
who are in immediate danger of loss of life and for whom there appears to be no
alternative to resettlement in the United States, or (b) refugees of compelling
concern to the United States such as former or present pohtical prisoners and
dissidents.
Priority Two. Former U.S. Government (U.S.G.) employees: refugees
employed by the U5.G. for at least one year prior to the claim for refugee status.
Tliis category also includes persons who were not official U.S.G. employees, but
who for at least one year were so integrated into U.S.G. offices as to nave been in
effect and appearance U.S.G. employees.
Priority Three. Family reunification: refugees who are spouses, unmarried
sons, unmarried daughters, or parents of persons in the United States. (The status
of the anchor relative m the United States must be one of the following: U.S. citizen,
lawful permanent resident aUen, refugee, asylee or member of certain groups of
public mterest parolees).
Priority Four. Other ties to United States: (a) Refugees employed by U.S.
foundations, U.S. voluntary agencies or U.S. business firms for at least one year
prior to the claim for refugee status; (b) Refugees trained or educated in the United
States or abroad under U.S.G. auspices;
Priority Four (Iran and Cuba). In addition to (a) and (b) above: (c) Refugees
who have served in positions of leadership or played a conspicuous role within a
religious denomination whose members are subjected to discrimination, including
the clergy, prominent layn\en, those v/ho have served in denominational
assemblies, governing bodies or councils; (d) Refugees who because of their
minority rehgious affiliations have been deprived of employment, have been driven
from their homes, have had their business confiscated or looted, have been denied
educational opporturuties available to others similarly situated in the same area, or
have been denied pensions that w^ould otherwise be available; and (e) Refugees who
have become targets of persecution because of a perceived identification with the
United States or the other nations of the West (including Israel).
Priority Four (East Asia). In addition to (a) and (b) above: (0 Persons
f)reviously in the civU service or armed forces of the former governments of
ndochina wlvo were associated v^Hh U.S.G. policies or U.S. -supported programs;
(g) Persons who played a meaningful role in the social, economic, political,
religious, intellectual, or artistic life of the former societies of Indochina, including
such persons as professors, philosophers, monks, or other transmitters of the
cullTjral traditions of these societies.
Priority Five. Additional family reunification: refugees who are: (a) married
sons or married daughters of persons in the United States; (b) unmarried siblings of
persons in the United States; (c) married siblings of persons in the United States; (d)
grandparents of persons in the United States, (e) grandchildren of persons in the
34
-19-
Uniled States; or (0 mbredistanlly related individuals who are part of the family
group and dependent on the family for support. (The status of^the anchor relative
in the United States must be one of the followring: U.S. citizen, lawful permanent
resident alien, refugee, asylee, member of certain groups of public interest parolees,
temporary resident alien, or conditional resident.)
Priority Six. Otherwise of special humanitarian concern: other refugees whose
admission is in the national interest.
3. INS Refugee Pi ocessing
Section 207 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) grants the Attorney
General the autliority to admit, at her discretion, any refugee vmo is not firmly
resettled in a third country, who is determined to be of special humanitarian
concern, and who is admissible to the United States as an immigrant. This authority
lias been delegated to the Immigration and NaturaUzation Service (LNS).
In both overseas refugee processing and domestic asylum proceedings, INS has
the statutory role of decision maker, deternrdning who meets the requirements for
refugee status.
INS Overseas Operations
The INS' overseas offices have a variety of responsibiUties administered by
tlu-ee District Offices located in Bangkok, Mexico City, and Rome. The overseas
officer corps currently consists of 21 officers in the Bangkok District, including
suboffices in Manila, Singapore, Seoul, and Hong Kong; 13 officers in the Mexico
City District, including suboffices in Monterrey, Guadalajara, Ciudad Juarez,
Tijuana, and Port-au-Prince; and 20 officers in the Rome District, including
suboffices in Frankfurt, Vienna, Athens, Moscow, London, Nairobi, and New Delhi.
One of the most important respor\sibilities of INS' overseas program is refugee
processing. The percentage of time each office devotes to this activity depends on
the refugee workload, as well as the staffing pattern and priorities within the office.
The permanent staff are augmented by temporary duty personnel from stateside
offices, as needed. Circuit rides to processing posts are arranged by the office
having geographic jurisdiction over the post.
In February 1993, 15 overseas Irrunigration Officers attended a 3 week refugee
and asylum training course which included instruction on U.S. and international
refugee law, interviewing techniques, writing skills, human rights, and country
conaitions. More than 70 career INS officers from domestic programs who may be
selected for temporary refugee processing assignments overseas, also completed the
training, as did newly-hired Asylum Officers.
Case Presentation to INS
A refugee applicant generally proceeds through the following steps before his
interview with an INS officer; an applicant is determined to be in need of protection
and resettlement by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
(UNHCR); he or she is referred to a Voluntary Agency (VOLAG) or Joint Voluntary
35
-20-
Agency (JVA) for pre-s<?reening; if the applicant is of a nationality of special
humanitarian concern and within a processing priority eligible for US.
consideration, the VOLAG or fVA prepares the case for suomission to INS by
assisting the applicant in filling out a request for refugee status, a biographic
information form, and other documents.
Tl\c Eligibility Detenninalion
Eligibility for refugee status is decided on an individual, case-by-case basis.
A personal interview of the applicant is held by an INS officer. The interview is
non-adversarial and is designed to elicit iriformation about the applicant's claim for
refugee status. Questions are asked about the reasons for the applicant's departure
from his country, his political or religious beliefs or activities, and problenns or fears
having to do \v\ih the authorities in his home country.
The determination of a w^ell-founded fear of persecution requires judging both
objective and subjective elements of an applicant's claim. Conditions m the country
of origin are taken into consideration ana the applicant's credibility is assessed.
Persecution is the most difficult element of the refugee definition to analyze
and apply- There is no universally accepted definition of the term "persecution,"
but it includes a threat to life or freedom. Discrimination in the treatment of various
groups is not, per se, persecution but at times an accumulation of discriminatory
nneasures may involve such significant denials of opportunities to participate in
society that it constitutes a threat to freedom. Economic hardship is not itself a basis
for eligibility for refugees status but persecution may take the form of economic
reprisals, such as demal of the opportunity to work.
Post-Interview Processing
After the interview, an applicant found eligible for refugee status must have a
medical examination and receive a sponsorship assurance. A refugee admission
number, subtracted from the annual ceiling, is allocated. Transportation
arrangements are made through the InternationsJ Organization for Migration (lOM)
and the refugee signs a travel loan, promising repayment of the cost of airfare.
At the U.S. Port of Entry, INS admits a refugee to the United States and
authorizes employment. After one year, a refugee is eligible for adjustment of
status to lawful permanent resident. Five years after admission, a refugee is eligible
for naturalization
Asylum Issues
In FY 1991, the INS miplemented the 1990 final rule on asylum, which
established not only a specialized corps of Asylum Officers, but an entirely new
organizational structure for processing asylum applications
Regional Asylum Offices were opened at seven sites around tlie United States
with a newly-hired corps of 82 Asylum Officers. During FY 1992, the Asylum
Officer Corps was expanded to 150 Officers to handle the increasing workload The
regional ofiices were located in Arlington, VA; Chicago, IL; Houston, TX;
36
-21-
Los Angeles, CA; Miami, FL; Newark, N], and San Fiancisco, CA. Tl\e asylum
program is administered from these seven locatioi^s, under the direction of INS
Headquarters.
When the Asylum Offices opened on April 2, 1991, they had inherited a backlog
of more than 114,000 applications for asylum. During FY 1991, approximately
60 000 asylum applications were filed; in FY 1991, this number increased to more
than 103,000 applications. Part of this increase has been due to the December 1990
settlement in the case of American Baptist Churches V - ThprnburRh. Under the
terms of the settlement, INS will provide asylum interviews to approximately 50,000
Guatemalans and 200,000 Salvadorans over the next several years.
During much of FY 1992, trained Asylum Officers were detailed to the U.S.
Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba to pre-screen Haitian migrants interdicted by
the U.S. Coast Guard. During tliis operation, the Asylum Officers conducted nearly
36,600 interviews of Haitian migrants. However, the details of officers to
Guantanamo Bay left the Asylum Offices, at times, v\nth fewer than half of the
authorized staff.
The Resource Information Center was mandated by the 1990 final rule. The
Center was established with the Headquarters Asylum Division to provide Asylum
Officers with easily accessible information on the human rights conditions in
refugee producing countries of origin. The Center provides country profile reports
as well as periodic "Alerts" on new or evolving situations of direct interest and
impact on the work of the Asylum Officers.
Section 209 (b) of the INA permits the adjustment of status of persons granted
asylum in the United States who have been in the United States as refugees for at
least one year and who continue to qualify as refugees. Up to 10,000 asylees may
adjust each year to lawful permanent resident status.
B. THE RESETTLEMENT PROCESS
1. VOLUNTARY AGENCY PROCESSING
The Department of State contracts witliprivate voluntary agencies - sometimes
referred to as Joint Voluntary Agencies or "JVAs" - to assist in the processing of
refugees for admission to the United States. Tliese agencies pre-screen applicants to
determine if they fall within the applicable processing priorities and otherwise
appear eligible to be scheduled for an INS refugee interview. In some cases,
individuals who appear to qualify for immigration to the U.S. are also advised of
those procedures. Iii addition, prior to interview, they assist the applicant in
completing the documentary requirements of the program. If approved, voluntary
agency staff guide the refugee through post-adjudication steps such as obtaining a
medical clearance and sponsorship assurance.
In FY 1994, Voluntary agencies will be under contract to the Department of
State at processing locations in Thailand, the Philippines, Malaysia, Hong Kong,
Turkey, Austria, Germany, Italy, Greece, Sierra Leone, Kenya, Saudi Arabia and
Croatia.
37
-22-
2. OVERSEAS LANGUAGE TRAINING AND CULTURAL ORTENTAnON
The DepartmeRt of State strives to ensure that refugees who are accepted for
admission to the United States are as well prepared as possible for the significant
changes they will experience during resettlement. In support of tl\is principle, the
Bureau for Refugee Programs operates pre-departure training and orientation
programs for eligible refugees at selected sites around the world.
In East Asia, the Bureau funds English-as-a-Second-Language and Cultural
Orientation (ESL/CO) programs in Thailand and the Philippines. At these sites
adult Indochinese refugees participate in a 20-week program consisting of ESL/CO,
and Work Orientation. A special program for 11 to 16 year olds. Preparation for
American Secondary Schools (PAsS), includes instruction in English, American
Studies, basic math, and school orientation. In the Philippines, a program for 6 to
11 year olds. Preparing Refugees for Elementary Programs (PREP), adso provides
instruction in English, baisic math, and school skills.
In FY 1993 about 20,000 Indochinese refugees, including Amerasians departing
Vietnam under the Orderly Departure Program, are expected to complete this
trairung.
In Africa, the Bureau conducts a short orientation program in Kenya which
provides services primarily to Ethiopian and Somali refugees enroute to the United
States.
In FY 1993, a pilot ESL program was also conducted in Kenya.
3. HEALTH SERVICES
The Office of Refugee Health (ORH), in the Office of the Assistant Secretary for
Health, Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), is the focal point for all
activities of the U.S. Public Health Service in refugee health. The ORH, in
conjunction with the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), develops health and
mental health policy and identifies problem areas and solutions. Public Health
Service agencies active in refugee matters include the Substance Abuse and Mental
Health Services Adnainistration, the Centers for Disease Control, and the Health
Resources and Services Administration.
Close and regular consultative relations are maintained with the Department of
State (DOS), Department of Justice, HHS's Office of Refugee Resettlement, State and
local health departments, and with international organizations such as the Uiiiled
Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the International
Organization for Migration (lOM).
Routine U.S. Public Health Service refugee operations include:
• Monitoring the quality of medical examinations provided to refugees in
Southeast Asia and worldwide, tlirough on-site visits and training conference;
• Inspection of each refugee at the US port of entry;
38
-23-
Notificalion of local health departmenls of each refugee's arrival, with
expedited notification of cases requiring special follow-up; and
Recognizing that the medical problems of refugees, while not necessarily
constituting a public health hazard, might adversely affect their successful
resettlement and employment, the Office of Refugee Resettlement will provide
about $2.86 million to State and local health agencies tlirough an interagency
agreement with the Public Health Service.
Administration of a domestic preventive health program which provides for
refugee health assessments loccdly following resettlement.
4. INTITAL RECEPTION AND PLACEMENT
Under Reception and Placement (R&P) program cooperative agreements
administered by the Bureau for Refugee Programs, twelve private voluntary
agencies are responsible for providing initial resettlement services to refugees
during their first 90 days in the United States and oversight of "free case" refugees
(those without relatives in the United States) for six months. Voluntary agencies
receive per capita funding ($630 in FY 1993), wliich is to be used along witli cash
and in-kind contributions from private and other sources. Refugee reception and
placement services include:
Sponsorship;
Pre-arrival resettlement planning;
Reception;
Basic needs support for 30 days;
Counseling and orientation; and
Health, employment, and other necessary referral services.
In FY 1993 the Bureau's on-site monitoring of the Reception and Placement
program included in-depth reviews of refugee resettlement in eight states. As a
result of the monitoring, strengtlis and weaknesses of voluntary agency programs
have been identified, and where needed, corrective action has been recorrvmended.
In FY 1993 the domestic resettlement program wrill have v^tnessed large-scale
arrivals of Soviets, and Amerasians and reeducation ex-detainees exiting Vietnam
through the Orderly Departure Program. Most arriving refugees join family already
resident in the United States.
5. TRANSPORTATION
The Department of State funds the transportation of refugees resettled in the
United States through a program administered by the International Organization
for Migration (lOM) which includes funding for international and domestic airfares,
lOM processing, medical screening, communications, documentation, and transit
accommodations where required. The cost of the airfares (over 80 percent of this
total) IS provided for refugees in the form of a loan; loan beneficiaries are
respoiisible for repaying these costs over time after resettlement Funds provided
for transportation loans and related services cover most refugees resettled in the
United States. Amerasian immigrants receive services provided to refugees. Other
immigrants enter the United States on prepaid tickets.
39
-24-
6. ONGOING IX)MESnC RlZSGrTLEMlINT PROGl^MS
For FY 1994, the Administration's proposed budget for refugee domestic
resettlement is $420.1 million.
The purpose of the domestic resettlement program is to provide assistance and
services to refugees in order that they may obtain employment and achi€ve
economic sufficiency at the earliest possible date. Feaeral resettlement assistance to
refugees is provided primarily through a State-administered refugee resettlement
program funded by the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), a component agency
of the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) in the Department of Health
and Human Services. States administer the provision of cash and medical assistance
and social services to refugees and maintain legal responsibility for the care of
unaccompanied refugee cnildren in the State.
Refugees may apply for and receive public assistance, such as Aid to Families
with Dependent Chilaren (APDC) and Medicaid, the same as American citizens. To
assist needy refugees who do not meet the categorical requirements of these
programs, special refugee cash assistance (RCA) and refugee medical assistance
(RMLA) are also made available. Single refugees, childless couples, and some
two-parent families are the primary beneficiaries of these two programs. For FY
1994, the Administration has proposed $284.4 million for transitional and medical
assistance for needy refugees during their first few montlis after arrival in the U.S.
These funds are requested to provide cash and medical assistance to eligible
refugees, including unaccompanied minors, under both the State-admirustered
programs and voluntary agency programs.
For FY 1994, the Administration has proposed $80.8 million for a broad range of
social services to refugees. As in past years, ORR will allocate 85 percent of the
social service funds to States on a formula basis according to their proportion of all
refugees who arrived in the U.S. during the past three years. The remaining 15
percent of social service funds will be awarded on a discretionary basis for
initiatives designed to reduce welfare dependency in States with large numbers of
refugees on welfare and to address the needs of special populations who experience
particular difficulty adjusting to life in the U.S.
In addition, special funds for services to refugees in counties which are
impacted by high concentrations of refugees and high welfare utilization rates are
provided by ORR through the targeted assistance program. For FY 1994, the
Administration has proposed $49.4 million for this program, with most funds
allocated for employment services which directly enhance refugee emplovment
potential, have specific employment objectives, and are designed to enable refugees
to obtain jobs within not more than one year Ten percent ofthe total appropriated
funds are awarded competitively for projects aimed at reducing welfare
dependency in highly impacted localities
40
-25-
lU. DOMESTIC IMrACr OF RHFUGEES
A. DEMOGRAPHIC IMPACT
1 . Popubition Composition
Refugee arrivals as a whole tend to be somewhat younger than the total U.S.
population. The median age for refugees arriving in FY 1992 was 26.8 years,
conipared with 28.1 years for all immigrants to the U.S. and 33.5 years for the total
U S population. Median age varied from a high of 36.2 for refxigee arrivals from the
former Soviet Union and 32.5 years for Cubans to the very low figures of 12.7 years
for Laotians and 17.0 years for Liberians. About 59 percent of Laotian refugee
arrivals and 55 percent of Liberian arrivals were under age 18, wliile the proportion
under age 18 from several countries, including Vietnam, the former Soviet Union,
Cuba, Ethiopia, and Iraq, were in the 25 to 27 percent range (approximating the U.S.
total population figure).
h\ 1992, about 64 percent of the U.S. total population was of workine age (age
16 through 64). The average for aU refugees admitted in FY 1992 was only slightly
higher (about 67 percent). The proportions of refugees from most countries either
exceeded the U.S. average or were witlun a few percentage points of that figure.
Only two refugee populations (Laotians with 42 percent and Liberians with 54
percent) had proportions that were considerably below the average for the U.S.
Only eight percent of FY 1992 arrivals were of retirement age (65 years or
older). This proportion was greatly skewed by the arrivals from the former Soviet
Union, wliich comprised almost one-half of the FY 1992 total. The elderly accounted
for 15 percent of Soviet arrivals, almost double the proportion of all FY 1992
arrivals, but only slightly higher than the proportion for the U.S. Dopulation (13
percent). In eight of the 12 largest refugee source countries, elderly refugees
comprised less than three percent of the arrival population (Albama, Ethiopia, Iraq,
Laos, Liberia, Romania, Somalia, and Vietnam).
Because these nationality groups differ from each other in their background
characteristics, any change in the source countries of the refugee flow means a
corresponding change in the demographic impact of the refugee population.
B. GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION
During FY 1992, 73.1 percent of newly arrived refugees and Amerasians were
resettled in ten States. The ten leading resettlement States received 71.6 percent of
the FY 1991 placements (Table III). The most notable trend is the rise from 14.4 to
20.2 percent in the proportion of refugees resettling in Nev>^ York coupled with the
decreasing share going to California. The California proportion fell from a high of
45 6 percent in FY 1988 to 289 percent in lY' 1991 and 25.3 percent in FY 1992 Much
of this change occurred because large numbers of Soviet Armemans who arrived in
FY 1988 ancfsettled near relatives in the Los Angeles area have been replaced by
Soviet Jews settling in New York and other cities in the East
41
-26-
arnvL^I^S'geS^^aTlJlV d.C'r '^?,''' ^''"^ '"<^^^ ^'-" ^^^ percent of all newly
during^ 19l?and theV.'^.tX^ of refugee arrivals .n every Stat^
communities in areas of^url^l !.f arrivals by State. Generally, refugee
of addit.ona? amHy reunificaHL "^"^"^"'^ ^° gro J with Amission
distribution of the CdSe re^..^. " ^^^^' Y, ''^°^^' ^'^^ S<^°S-pl^'c
percent living in CaIifortSTh^?e1t^^t^Xred"^:i^^^^^'' ^'^ "^^'^ ^
from'^aterotiS^Wheif^:;!^^^^^^^^^
Indochinese. This has tendSv^ difft^c ^ ^° "^ different from that of the
communities. La^ge numbed of fl^S^Lh^ '""r"' of refugee arrivals upon local
the Northeast andfhe ZiwesL ^^' '^^^ees have been resettled in cities in
number, almost 101 8W ^th M.^ v I >'^^'^- S^^f°^^« resettled the largest
growing raSX ThVn'p^i ^ -^^^^ "" ^^^°"^ P^^^^ ^^ ^'"^ost 101,200 ind
^m^sft[orof Stall? ^r:SZlZLVr '''i" '^°"^ f ^ ""^^ ^^"^"°" ^ ^tl.nic
refugee popuIatiorTHoricfa ifiS I^ T- ^"^l?^ ^^^ ^^^^^ ^^^ ^^^ '^^5^^
majo^ritiS o^f nonSSSSe re^gt^'^"^'"' ""'"^ ^'^'y' ^^^ ^^^ ^-^ have
to new nL'df s^'^vXL^ge^^^^^^^^^ ?^S^^ P°P"'^^-" ^^^'s in response
FY 1992 46Dercer^fthpl^^PP^^^^"'^''^P^"^''^°^ the new arrivals, fn
during f7i?9Tmo3 ^ther refit"''' ^°'"'^'- 'T^^^^^ ^^^ ^^'X 3^ P^^^^nt
FY 19fl, v..thoJynl\S^l^^^^^ m lower propor'tionS^ than in
increases. In generaf sSL th.Tw ^^"?'>'^'^"^' ^nd Somalia) showing sharp
refugees saw fheir S 1992 a nvak nL k""^ '° '''''''' ^^'^' ^""^^^"^ °f §°^'^t
fall &Iow expectations ^^°'" expectations, and the rest saw arrivals
42
-27-
TAurJE in
REFUGEI^S AND AMERASIANS:
NEW ARRIVALS IN TEN LEADING STATES IN FY 1991 AND FY 1992
FY 1992
State
%
Numbo:
California
253
33,249
New York
20.2
26,601
Texas
4.5
5,918
Washington
4.1
5,421
Florida
4.0
5321
Illinois
3.9
5,083
Pennsylvania
3.2
4,222
Massachusetts
3.2
4,185
Maryland
2.4
3,142
Georgia
2.4
3,124
TOTAL
73.1
96.266
FY 1991
State
%
NujoabcT
California
28.9
32,778
New York
14.4
16,300
Texas
5.1
5,831
Florida
4.9
5,609
Wasliington
4.2
4,777
Illinois
3.5
3,947
Massachusetts
3.0
3,402
Pennsylvania
3.0
3,382
Georgia
2.3
2,608
New Jersey
2.3.
2,604
71.6
81,238
Source: Office of Refugee Resettlement
43
-28-
TABLE IV
REFUGEES AJ^ID AMERASIANS:
ARRIVALS FROM AIX COUNTRIES BY STATE IN FY 1992
State
Number
%
Sfete
Number
.To.
Alabama
311
0.2
Nevada
305
0.2
Alaska
81
0.1
New Hampslure
213
0.2
Arizona
1,520
1.2
New Jersey
2,896
2.2
Arkansas
71
0.1
New^ Mexico
389
0.3
California
33,249
25.3
New York
26,601
20.2
Colorado
1,135
0.9
North Carolina
887
0.7
Connecticut
1,217
0.9
North Dakota
477
0.4
Delaware
64
a/
OWo
2330
1.8
Dist. /Columbia
1,100
0.8
Oklahoma
354
03
Ron da
5,321
4.0
Oregon
2,496
1.9
Georgia
3,124
2.4
Pennsylvarua
4,27.2
3.2
Hawaii
336
0.3
Rhode Island
443
03
Idjiho
305
0.2
South Carolina
144
0.1
Illinoif-
5,083
3.9
South Dakota
273
0.2
Indiana
350
0.3
Tennessee
1,309
1.0
Iowa
808
0.6
Texas
5,918
4.5
Kajisas
700
0.6
Utah
5^.5
0.4
Kentucky
640
0.5
Vermont
263
0.2
Louisiana
811
0.6
Virginia
1,987
1.5
Maine
157
0.1
Washington
5,421
4.1
Maryland
3,142
2.4
West Virginia
46
a/
Massachusetts
4,185
3.2
Wisconsin
1,87.1
1.4
M'lchigan
2,682
2.0
Wyoming
•1
3-'
Minnesota
2,754
2.1
Other b/
43
s/
Misiussippi
44
a/
Missouri
2,065
1.6
Moiitana
83
0.1
Nebrajka
791
0.6
TOIAI.
UL^Li
IWO
a/ Less than 0.1 percent. Percentages do not add to total due to rounding oi figures,
b/ Includes Terntones and unknown States not show^n separately-
44
-29-
TADLE V
INDOQilNESE REFUGEES
ESTIMATED CUMULATTVE STATE POPULATIONS a/
%of
Stgte of
Estimated
Nal^l
Residence
Totel
Total
Alabama
3,600
0.4
Alaska
100
b/
Arizoi«
9,000
0.9
Arkansas
3,500
0.3
California
409,800
39.9
Colorado
13,800
1.4
Connecticut
9,000
0.9
Delaware
400
h/
D. of Columbia
2,600
03
Florida
17,200
1.7
Georgia
14,500
1.4
Hawaui
8,500
0.8
Idaho
2,000
0.2
Illinois
31,000
3.0
Indiana
4,700
0.5.
Iowa
11,300
1.1
Kansas
11,900
1.2
Kentucky
3,700
0.4
Louisiana
16,800
1.6
Maine
1,800
0.2
Maryland
12,000
1.2
Massachusetts
32,200
3.1
Michigan
14,100
1.4
Minnesota
37,700
3.7
Mississippi
2,000
0.2
Missouri
9,500
0.9
Montana
1,100
0.1
Nebraska
3,700
0.4
775 THROUGH SEPTEMBER I
992
%of
Stat£_Qf
Estiniatcd
Nat'l
Residence
Total
Total
Nevada
2,800
03
New Hampshire
1,200
0.1
New Jersey
9,500
0.9
New Mexico
2,600
03
New York
36,000
3.5
North Carolina
8,000
0.8
North Dakota
1,100
0.1
Ohio
13,500
13
Oklahoma
10,100
1.0
Oregon
22,200
2.2
Pennsylvania
31,600
3.1
Rhode Island
7,900
0.8
South Carolina
2,700
03
South Dakota
1,100
0.1
Tennessee
7,600
0.7
Texas
■ 76,900
7.5
Utah
10,000
1.0
Vermont
700
0.1
Virginia
26,100
2.5
Washington
47,800
4.7
West Virginia
400
b/
Wisconsin
18,500
1.8
Wyoming
200
b/
Guam
300
b/
Other
c/
b/
TOTAL
imQ
a/ Adjusted for secondary migration through 9/30/92, rounded to the nearest
hundred. Not adjusted for births and deatlis in the U.S. These figures do not include
the 56,000 Amerasian immigrants and accompanying family members that have arrived
since FY 1988.
h/ Less than 0.1 percent.
c/ Fewer than 100.
Source: Office of Refugee Resettlement
45
-30-
TABLE VI
NON-INDOCHINESE REFUGEES: ARRIVALS BY STATE
DURING FY 1983 - FY 1992 a/
Non-Indo-
Percent
chinese
of State's
States
Arrivals
Arrivals
Alabama
356
14.4%
Alaska
205
50.9%
Arizona
4,154
36.2%
Arkansas
207
14.8%
California
101,765
37.9%
Colorado
3358
38.6%
Connecticut
5,686
55.7%
Delaware
226
67.9%
Dist. /Columbia
2,315
36.3%
Florida
24398
72.1%
Georgia
5,172
32.7%
Hawaii
80
2.6%
Idaho
1,757
623%
Illinois
23,748
67.1%
Indiana
1,405
50.3%
Iowa
880
13.1%
Kansas
860
14.0%
Kentucky
840
21.2%
Louisiana
410
6.1%
Maine
1,366
53.2%
Maryland
10,023
62.1%
Massachusetts
14,039
44.9%
Micliigan
10,207
63.8%
Minnesota
4,287
19.5%
Mississippi
64
63%
Missouri
5311
46.4%
Montana
331
51.6%
Nebraska
1,159
29.0%
States
Nevada 1,702
New Hampshire 848
New Jersey 11398
New Mexico 761
New York 101,197
North Carolina 1,281
North Dakota 991
Ohio 7,746
Oklahoma 583
Oregon 6,857
Pennsylvania 14,040
Rhode Island 1,775
South Carolina 301
South Dakota 1,290
Tennessee 2,418
Texas 11,476
Utah 1,776
Vermont 848
Virginia 5,479
Washington 12,035
West Virginia 80
Wisconsin 1,799
Wyoming 99
Other 143
TOTAL 411,732
Non-Indo- Percent
Chinese of State's
Arrivals Arrivals
55.6%
48.5%
68.6%
30.6%
84.7%
18.0%
56.4%
59.5%
12.7%
47.6%
52.0%
38.1%
30.1%
75.0%
30.7%
23.9%
26.1%
56.3%
31.8%
37 0%
27.5%
15.5%
67.3%
94.7%
46.7%
a/ The source of these data is the ORR Data System Data on non-Indochinese
refugees by State are not available before the end of FY 1983.
Source: Office of Refugee Resettlement
46
-31-
C. SECONDAKY MIGRATION
Secondary migration is the term used to describe movement by refugees from
the location wnere they were initially resettled upon arrival in this country to some
other place. A number of explanations for secondary migration by refugees have
been suggested: employment opportunities, the pull of an established ethnic
community, more generous welfare benefits, better training opportunities,
reunification with relatives, or a congenial climate.
ORR has developed a system based on reports from the States for compiling
and maintaining data on secondary migration. These data are important not only
for general program planning, but also for the accurate computation of formulas for
distribution of funds to States. Results of the State reports are contained in ORR's
Annual Reports to the Congress.
Almost every State experienced both gains and losses through secondary
migration in FY 1992. On balance, eleven States gained net population through
secondary migration. The largest net gain was the State of Wasliington, with net
in-migration of 2,872. North Carolina, with strong in-migration and little
out-migration, recorded a net gain of 1,261. California and New York recorded the
largest net losses due to migration, 626 and 543, respectively.
Another gauge of the effect of migration (other than the magnitude) is the
proportion of the refugee population currently served by States who are secondary
migraiits. For all States combined, the average was only about eight percent. For
California, only about four percent of refugees currently served initially resettled in
another State. The comparable figure was only about two percent in New York. In
other States, secondary migrants were a large proportion of the service population,
f)articularly in Arkansas (46 percent), Mississippi (45 percent). North Carolina, and
owa (both with about 33 percent). Other States with a significantly larger than
average proportion of their service population who are secondary migrants include
Washington and South Dakota (19 percent), Kansas (18 percent), Oklahoma and
Texas (15 percent), and Louisiana (14 percent).
D. ECONOMIC IMPACT
The net economic effect of refugees in the U.S. derives ultimately from their
contribution to the American economy and from the Federal, State, and local
government taxes they pay. In the short term, the primary question is whether or
not refugees are obtaining employment which enables them to become
self-supporting members of American society. ORR conducts an annual survey of
Southeast Asian refugees who have come to the U.S. during the five previous vears.
The most recent of these surveys was conducted in October 1992 and includea 598
refugee households that agreed to be interviewed. Results from the survey indicate
that the labor force participation rate (those working or seeking work) for refugees
16 or older was 37 percent, compared to an equivalent rate of 66 percent for the
overall U.S. population.
As in previous years the labor force participation of refugees varied with length
of residence in the U.S. The most recent (1992) arrivals had a labor force
participation rate of 33 percent, while the 1991 arrivals had a labor force
participalion rate of 37 percent.
47
-32-
The 1992 survey also provides data on unemployed refugees (those who are in
the labor force, but not working). Late in 1992, the overall U.S. unemployment rate
was 7.2 percent, while the unemployment rate for refugees of working age was 16
percent. Significant changes in unemployment occur for refugees over time. In late
1992, the unemployment rate for refugees who arrived in 1991 was 19 percent. The
unemployment rate of refugees v/ho arrived the year before was 14 percent, while
the rate for those who arrived in 1987 w^as six j>ercent.
48
-33-
IV. ESTIMATED COSTS OF REFUGEE MOVEMENT AND RESETTLEMENT
The Federal agencies which incur major program costs for the admission and
resettlement of refugees in the United States are the Department of State, the
Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Justice's
Immigration and NaturaUzation Service.
The Department of State provides funding for: (a) processing of refugees
abroad to identify those persons who may be ehgible for the U.S. refugee
adnaissions program; (b) ESL/CO/VO programs for refugees overseas; (c) medical
examinations and transportation assistance tlirough the International Organization
for Migration; (d) initial reception and placement services in the United States
through cooperative agreements with voluntary agencies.
The Department of Health and Human Services has primary responsibility for
the domestic resettlement of refugees. Under the Refugee Act of 1980, eligible
refxigees may receive support services designed to facilitate their successful
settlennent.
The Immigration and Naturalization Service has responsibility for and bears
the costs of determining eligibility for U.S. refugee resettlement.
The estimated costs of services provided by the Department of State, the
Department of Health and Human Services and the Immigration and Naturalization
Service are based on the Administration's FY 1994 budget request for the funded
admission of up to 120,000 refugees.
It is not possible to provide accurate cost data on refugee utilization of other
Federal programs because statistics do not account for refugees separately from the
general population. Because of the significance of the AFDC, Medicaid, and
Supplemental Security Income programs, however, an estimate based on the best
available information concerning refugee utiUzation of these progranns has been
made.
49
-34-
- = TABLE Vn
ESTIMATED COSTS OF REFUGEE PROCESSING,
MOVEMENT AND RESETTLEMENT
FY 1994 ESTIMATE*
($ MiUions)
AGENCY
DEPARTMENT OF STATE: Bureau for Refugee Prograins
Refugee Processing
Language/ Orientation Programs Overseas
Transportation
Reception & Placement
Estimated
Funding
22.13
17.40
102.88
Z8^
Subtotal 220.77
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
ADMINISmATION FOR CHILDREN AND FAMUJES:
Ofifice of Refugee Resettlement
Transitional and Medical Services
Employment Services
Targeted Assistance
Preventive Health
Subtot2il
28438
80.80
49.40
5.47
420.05
OTHER HHS
Family Support Payments to States
Medicaid
Supplemented Security Income
54.61
21.99
2MA
Subtotal 100.44
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE: Immigration and Naturalization Service
Refugee Processing, Initial Interviewing and
Other Considerations of Apphcants
Soviet Processing
6.17
Subtotal
15.12
GRAND TOTAL
756.38
^Figures are based on the Administration's budget request for FY 1994, for the
funded admission of up to 120,000 refugees. At the time this report was prepared.
Congress had not completed action on tnis request.
50
Senator Kennedy. Thank you very much. Just to remind our col-
leagues, the Secretary has to depart at 3:30 and I see six of us
here, so we will take 5 minutes and then the rest of the panel will
remain for whatever time that we might want.
I want to just comment, Mr. Secretary, on the sensitivity to the
Amerasian children which we were not very sensitive to in the
early years following the Vietnam War, and second those "political
re-education" inmates now being released. We took over a million
refugees from Vietnam, but in many instances the people that were
the most committed in trying to help and assist American service
people were left behind in 1975 ana put in jail. If there are any
people we owe some responsibility to, it is those political prisoners
who have been released and whose lives would be threatened in
Vietnam.
SITUATION IN BOSNIA
There are three areas that I would like to try and cover very
quickly. One is the issue of Bosnia. We know that the U.N. High
Commissioner continues to report harassment of humanitarian
workers. Lack of security continues to hamper relief convoys. Relief
workers have been killed or they remain in grave danger. Relief
supplies remain piled up in warehouses. Apparently, the most re-
cent humanitarian success in Bosnia has been turning on the water
for Sarajevo.
The prospect for ratification of the current agreement by the
Muslim parliament will be in question next week, and as I under-
stand it, the European nations, especially Britain and France, are
urging the Muslims to ratify it. Is the United States urging the
Muslims to ratify it as well or is there a possibility that the recent
agreement could be renegotiated and include some additional land?
Secretary Christopher. Mr. Chairman, the United States be-
lieves that the solution to this problem at the present time lies in
the area of a negotiated settlement. The problem has a long and,
in many ways, horrible history, but where we are now, we think
that a negotiated settlement would be the best result.
When President Izbekovich of Bosnia was here a few days ago,
the President and I met with him and we told him that we re-
spected whatever judgment he would make about that. We indi-
cated to him that he would have the support of the United States
to implement an agreement if he entered into one, subject to var-
ious conditions, such as the fact that it was entered into in good
faith and that the implementation would be through NATO.
But I think in response to his request, we indicated that we
would be prepared to implement it, but we did not, Mr. Chairman,
intend to, nor did we put any pressure on him to reach the conclu-
sion. The United States has said that it would respect the decision
of the parties, and I think that it can only be up to President
Izbekovich and his parliament and the other leaders of that coun-
try as to what conclusion they want to reach.
We have indicated to both the Serbs and the Croatians that we
hope they will show maximum flexibility in recognizing the reason-
able requests of the Bosnian Government so as to bring this hu-
manitarian tragedy to an end. As far as additional flexibility, it is
a very dynamic situation at the moment. I think the negotiations
51
continue even as they move into next week's possible vote in the
parliament.
There are several areas where President Izbekovich is pressing
for additional concessions — one, an outlet to the sea; second, addi-
tional territory in the east. I have some hope that both the Croats
and the Serbs will show enough flexibility so that an agreement
can be reached. If an agreement is not reached, and it certainly
will not be a perfect agreement if it is, but if it is not reached, we
are in for a very tragic winter.
PROSPECTS FOR U.S. ACTION IN BOSNIA
Senator Kennedy. Well, if the violence continues, are we pre-
pared to use military action to protect U.N. relief operations, par-
ticularly this coming winter?
Secretary Christopher. Mr. Chairman, I think we are still pre-
pared to act within the context of the NATO resolution which the
United States took the lead in fostering, and that is that if there
is continued strangulation of Sarajevo, if there is strangulation of
the other safety areas in Bosnia, or if there is interference with the
relief efforts or if we are requested to provide troops, NATO forces
will be used pursuant to that resolution. But I would caution that
there are fairly stiff conditions to the use of NATO air power, and
I think we would use it only in conjunction with a decision taken
by NATO. It would not be a unilateral act by the United States.
PAN AM 103 TERRORIST CASE
Senator Kennedy. On the Pan Am 103 issue, it is the fifth anni-
versary of that atrocity coming up this December, and the current
sanctions against Libya have clearly failed, although efforts are un-
derway to strengthen them. As you know, many of us in Congress
feel that the sanction most likely to have an impact on Libya is an
oil embargo. More than half of the Senate is on record supporting
that step. President Clinton has said on several occasions that he
would support an international oil embargo if lesser sanctions fail.
Is that still the administration's plan?
Secretary CHRISTOPHER. Mr. Chairman, we are anxious to
strengthen the sanctions. At the present time, the United Nations,
through its Secretary General, has asked for a brief period of time
to try to bring the Libyans into compliance. That time expires on
the 1st of October. If they are not in compliance with the resolution
at that time, if they have not turned the two individuals over for
prosecution either in Scotland or the United States, we will press
very hard for more sanctions in the United Nations.
I believe those sanctions are likely to take the form of an embar-
go on certain oil equipment which could be important to Libya, as
well as the freeze of certain assets. In this situation, we have been
negotiating with our allies, Britain and France, to get their agree-
ment on the sanctions because we really need their support for any
kind of sanctions that are imposed. So at the present time, we are
trying to stiffen the sanctions in the area of an asset freeze, as well
as certain oil-producing equipment.
52
ISRAEL-PLO AGREEMENT
Senator Kennedy. Well, the equipment is of some value, but I
don't think it replaces the total oil embargo. Just quickly, Mr. Sec-
retary — my time is about to expire — on the Israeli-PLO agreement,
could you give us some insight about what kind of arrangements
might emerge for the return of the Palestinian refugees both in
terms of the West Bank and Gaza and what steps the administra-
tion is prepared to take in that process?
Secretary Christopher. Yes, Mr. Chairman. The refugees have
been a constant subject of discussion in the bilateral tracks be-
tween the Israelis and the Palestinians. It has also been a major
subject of the so-called multilateral discussions between the 30 na-
tions who have been particularly involved in this.
Perhaps even more relevant, the declaration of principles be-
tween the Israelis and the Palestinians have a special paragraph
on the refugees. The refugees are a subject to be treated in the so-
called final status negotiations, which do not begin for 2 years, but
that subject is very much on the mind, I think, of all the people
involved, but it is not anything that will be resolved immediately.
I would think that if there is a resolution that permits the refu-
gees to return, there will be many who will want to return, but it
is almost impossible at this point to estimate the size of those num-
bers. That particular issue has been, by the parties — that is, by the
Palestinians themselves and the Israelis — reserved for final status
negotiations.
Senator Kennedy. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Senator Simpson?
"refugees" from the former soviet union
Senator Simpson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, we
put on the books an amendment called the Lautenberg amend-
ment, which was to simply presume that anyone from the Soviet
Union was a refugee, in a sense. Now, in this allocation proposal,
we have 55,000 listed for the former Soviet Union and Eastern Eu-
rope, and I think we all know that things have changed dramati-
cally since we first passed the Lautenberg amendment.
So my question, is what is the nature, if you can tell us, of the
persecution of Evangelicals, Catholics, Jews, and Orthodox Chris-
tians in Russia. What are they experiencing today?
Of course, so the public will know, this is the key to what refugee
status is all about, a person fleeing persecution or having a well-
founded fear of persecution based on race, religion, national origin,
or membership in a political or social organization. We must stick
with that definition, which is the U.N. definition and our definition,
or change that definition.
My question is, isn't it true that many of these refugees have
continued to live safely in that country, in Russia, for a number of
years since first applying for refuge status? I think this is a very
critical thing when there are so many real, real refugees around
the world, and I just want to be sure that we have our hearts open
and are ready to receive those who are really fleeing political perse-
cution. Could you tell me?
53
Secretary Christopher. Senator Simpson, I would say the situa-
tion in the Soviet Union is rapidly changing in the direction of
greater freedom and less persecution. As you know, there is in-
country processing in the Soviet Union and all of those who are
permitted to enter the United States must meet the very severe
tests that you have mentioned.
That kind of persecution has diminished, but it is not ended in
the Soviet Union. It is possible to live in a country and yet be sub-
jected to threats of that persecution which justify entry into the
United States. But as I said in my statement, I think. Senator, that
situation is in the process of changing, is being rationalized, and
I would expect over the next couple of years to have quite a dra-
matic change in that if the conditions of growing freedom persist
in the Soviet Union. But the events of the last few days, I think,
are a reminder to us that it is a very volatile situation there and
we cannot be certain that that situation has come to a happy end-
ing at this point.
Senator Simpson. Well, certainly, we have put our faith and
strength in the leader of Russia, so we must think that things are
going quite well there, I would think.
Secretary Christopher. Senator, I think that the events of the
last few days have shown the strength of President Yeltsin. His de-
cision to have an elected parliament, I think, is a reflection of his
belief in democracy. The news today that he will have a presi-
dential election, or there will be an open presidential election next
year, I think is a confirmation that he has a deep belief in democ-
racy and is willing to subject himself, as well as others, to the bal-
lot box, which is where those decisions ought to be made. So we
have got a good deal of confidence in that. On the other hand, the
issue remains open and needs to be followed very closely.
Senator Simpson. Well, I hope you will because refugee deter-
mination is a very serious type of thing. It should not be something
that we lightly give, and certainly it should be done on a case-by-
case basis — I have always said that — and not under some presump-
tion for a block of persons, some who are persecuted and some who
are not, and who claim refugee status and don't come, or come to
a different country or go to several other countries before they get
here. That is a very critical thing.
The Lautenberg amendment required us to presume Russians
are refugees, but it did not require the Department to admit as a
refugee a single person from Russia. I think it doesn't require that
you allocate nearly 50 percent of the refugee admissions to that
area, and I hope you can help us address that issue without any
smattering of ugliness, which is sometimes present in discussions
of this issue.
My time is expired. Well, your time had hardly started when
[Laughter.]
Senator Kennedy. Go ahead, go ahead.
Senator Simpson. Who handed me this? Was this — are you hand-
ing me this? [Laughter.]
abuse of amerasian program
One more issue, Amerasian children. Just quickly, we were all
right here — Ted Kennedy, myself, Howard, Strom Thurmond. We
54
worked; we had hearings. We worked hard on an Amerasian bill.
We were told then, and I remember all the testimony, there were
possibly 25,000 Amerasian children in Vietnam. It turned out that
for every Amerasian child, there were three or four accompanying
relatives who had purchased that status in many cases, and it has
become an extraordinary disruption. We have admitted now 83,000
people. Amerasian children are not children anjrmore, and the sys-
tem was gimmicked.
Could you please tell me how we got to that point? I understand
the program was fraught with fraud. We have now admitted, as I
say, 83,000. We were told there were 25,000. Will the program real-
ly conclude next year, or will the groups hold it open forever, and
what has now been done about the fraud that was so vivid in the
program?
Secretary CHRISTOPHER. Senator, the program will end next year,
and I hope you don't think I am diverting to one of my colleagues
the hardest of the questions, but most of that happened before my
watch and I wonder if I could ask Ambassador Zimmermann to
comment.
Ambassador Zimmermann. Well, it happened before my watch,
too, but I will comment. [Laughter.]
Senator Simpson. Has anybody been watching? [Laughter.]
Ambassador Zimmermann. There has clearly been a lot of fraud
in this program and we are devoting a lot of resources to cut it out.
Legislation did provide that the Amerasian people could bring with
them family members, and that is, I think, the largest reason why
there was a much larger group that came than were the original
Amerasians.
But as the Secretary said, while this has not been a fraud-free
program, it is a program that is ending and it is a program to
which we have a large moral commitment to bring these people to
the tjnited States. I have had a chance, as I am sure you have,
Senator, to see them resettled in the United States, and that is one
of the great success stories, I think. So with all the problems we
have had, I think when we bring the program to a close it will be
seen as a very successful one and one that did us proud.
Senator Simpson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Kennedy. Senator Metzenbaum?
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. HOWARD M. METZENBAUM, A
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF OHIO
considering a refugee repayment plan?
Senator Metzenbaum. Mr. Secretary, in the refugee consulta-
tions in 1988, I had proposed that we make all of refugee resettle-
ment costs reimbursable to the U.S. Government. In effect, it would
be a refugee repayment plan. It costs us money to resettle refugees
and it seems to me it is not unreasonable to expect those costs to
be repaid.
Now, after considerable study, we determined that the proposal
wasn't practicable at that time, but I must say I am still interested
in the costs of resettlement to the American taxpayer. In 1988, the
cost of resettlement was roughly $7,000 per refugee. My question
is I don't know whether that is still a reasonable figure or not,
55
whether it is a correct one or an accurate one, but whether or not
you think there is any possibiUty of getting a program together so
that the refugees that we admit would have an obligation to repay
those dollars to the American taxpayers.
Secretary Christopher. Senator, it is certainly, in theory, a very
attractive program, and a great many of the refugees are very suc-
cessful. But I think that the program, once again, would have a
great practical difficulty in following the refugees, waiting until
they had reached a sufficient status of prosperity so they could pay
it back. I think there would continue to be great practical difficulty
in it.
The pattern for refugees — and I don't want to pose as a great ex-
pert on this, but it takes probably a decade for them to reach a
level of income and prosperity that would make it feasible to repay
their resettlement costs. So while in theory it seems attractive, I
think my own instinct about it is that there remains considerable
practical difficulty.
Senator Metzenbaum. I would like to urge, Mr. Secretary, that
we at least explore that subject. Not all, of course, could repay.
Many of them could repay out of their pocket change, and I think
if they could, we ought to try to get the money back.
Secretary Christopher. Senator, we will look at that again.
Thank you, sir.
RUSSIAN IMMIGRATION LAW?
Senator Metzenbaum. Has the Russian Parliament adopted
their immigration law as yet? They were going to, but then we
didn't hear anything more about it.
Secretary Christopher. I am afraid I can't answer that question.
Can you, Ambassador Zimmermann?
Ambassador Zimmermann. I am sorry. Could you repeat it. Sen-
ator?
Senator Metzenbaum. Pardon?
Ambassador ZIMMERMANN. Could you repeat the question?
Senator Metzenbaum. Yes. The Russian Parliament was in the
process of passing an immigration law, and then things seemed to
be slowed down for obvious reasons. My question is has that law
ever been enacted?
Ambassador ZIMMERMANN. I don't know the answer to that.
Secretary CHRISTOPHER. We will supply it to you, Senator.
Senator Metzenbaum. I would appreciate it if you would supply
it to the Chair and the rest of the members of the committee.
Secretary CHRISTOPHER. We certainly will.
REFUGEES IN GERMANY
Senator Metzenbaum. This question is not specifically with re-
spect to the refugee problem, but the situation with respect to refu-
gees in Germany is shocking. Surely, a majority of Germans are
fair-minded and tolerant people. Yet, the wave of terror against
guest workers and refugees conjures up memories of a much worse
time, and it posses a risk to the refugees and ultimately it poses
a risk to Western stability.
56
I have spoken on the Senate floor about the silence of the Ger-
man Government on this violence, and I frankly don't think Bonn
has done enough. The largest step was to change the German Con-
stitution to limit entry of non-Germans. What are the U.S. plans,
should the German violence against outsiders continues, and do
you think this matter has relevance to Western security?
Secretary Christopher. Senator, on your last point I think the
way the Germans treat the refugees in their country is very impor-
tant not only to other countries, but to the Germans themselves.
I have talked with Chancellor Kohl about this. I have talked with
the Foreign Minister, Klaus Kinkel, about it, and I can assure you
they are very concerned about the reputation that the Germans
have and the German Government has with respect to the treat-
ment of its refugees. They deplore these ugly incidents just as
much as we do.
Not by any way of explanation or justification, but the number
of refugees that the Germans have taken is just an enormous num-
ber. Their open refugee policy requiring them to take all who want
to enter has flooded their country with refugees and it has given
them some very tense issues throughout their country.
Indeed, the intolerance of refugees is a worldwide phenomenon
and is reaching crisis proportions in many countries. It has to be
sternly resisted, but from my contacts with the top German lead-
ers. Senator, I want to assure you of their deep concern about this
matter.
Senator Metzenbaum. Thank you.
HEARING SCHEDULE
Senator KENNEDY. For the members here, we are going to have
a series of votes starting at 3:30, so I might suggest that each per-
son maybe ask one question of the Secretary, He is going to have
to leave at 3:30. We have got about 12 minutes. So if that is an
agreeable way of proceeding, it is not terribly satisfactory, I think,
for all of us, but I think
Senator Cohen. Could the record indicate that the excesses of
Senator Simpson have caused this compression of time for the rest
of us? [Laughter.]
Senator Kennedy. So if we could, we will each ask a question.
If the vote is delayed, we will just continue that until the Secretary
has to leave.
Senator Thurmond?
FUTURE OF U.S. REFUGEE PROGRAM
Senator Thurmond. Secretary Christopher, the number of refu-
gees worldwide seems to be increasing, while the number of refu-
gees proposed for admission into the United States has been re-
duced from last year. That is correct, isn't it?
Secretary Christopher. Yes, sir, although it is largely steady at
about 120,000, Senator.
Senator Thurmond. Your written statement indicates that, if
necessary, you are prepared to expand the refugee program. Is it
likely that there will be a need to increase the number of refugees
57
admitted into the United States, and what is the maximum num-
ber of refugees that you would favor admitting?
Secretary Christopher. Senator, I would nope that the decHne
in numbers from Vietnam and perhaps from the Soviet Union or
Eastern Europe might give us some room to respond to needs from
other parts of the world. I wouldn't be prepared to commit to any
larger number at the present time. Part of the reason for that, Sen-
ator, is I think it is very important that we have the financial re-
sources to take care of those whom we admit.
I think the new policy this year of making sure that HHS has
enough funds for the resettlement of refugees admitted is a very
desirable policy and should be continued. So I hope we can have
some flexioility in the numbers by reason of the dropping of the
numbers from Vietnam, both the Amerasians and those Vietnam-
ese who aided us.
The 120,000 number is about 2^2 times what was regarded at
least at one time as the normal number. So I would not say at the
E resent time. Senator, that I foresee a great increase in that num-
er, but it will certainly be up to the President and up to the Con-
gress if there is an exigent situation that causes us to recommend
a larger number.
Senator Kennedy. Senator Simon?
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. PAUL SIMON, A U.S. SENATOR
FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
Senator SiMON. In writing, I would be interested in getting your
response to S. 618 that Senator Riegle is the chief sponsor of and
Senator Kennedy and I are cosponsoring. Also, in writing, the Afri-
can numbers where we have one of the worst refugee problems —
their portion at 7,000 is, frankly, a very small portion. I would be
interested in your reaction.
DECLINE OF FOREIGN STUDENTS IN THE UNITED STATES
The night before last, I took the little green book, the INS fact
book, and I noticed in 1991 students coming into the United States
from abroad were 282,000; in 1992, 241,000, a drop of 41,000. I
don't have any projections for 1993. I have consistently felt that
one of the great assets to our country abroad are those who study
here. Is this drop in numbers of students a policy decision, and why
this sudden fairly dramatic drop in foreign students? Mr. Sec-
retary, I assume that maybe should be addressed to Ms. Sale or
someone else.
Secretary Christopher. Thank you. Senator.
Ms. Sale?
STATEMENT OF CHRIS SALE
Ms. Sale. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. It is not a change in policy.
I would have to go back and look at the subordinate numbers on
a country-by-country basis to give you a better analysis, Senator,
and we would be happy to submit that for the record. It is simply
a compilation of the numbers we processed rather than any specific
change in policy. It could be that world conditions simply put a
hole in how many people were coming in, but I would have to give
you a country analysis on that.
58
[Prepared statement of Ms. Sale follows:]
Prepared Statement of Chris Sale on Behalf of the U.S. Immigration and
Naturalization Service
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee: Good morning. I am pleased to
have the opportunity to discuss with you the proposed United States refugee reset-
tlement admissions pro-am for fiscsd year 1994 and the role of the Immigration
and Naturalization Service (INS) in the program.
Fiscal year 1993 has been a year of challenges and changes for INS. Today, I
would like to report how we have faced some of the new demands.
Let me begin with Haiti. In February 1992, INS and the Department of State es-
tablished an in-country refugee processing program in Haiti. Haitians at risk of per-
secution were afforded opportunity for U.S. resettlement without having to face the
potential dangers of the sea. Initially, the program was limited to exceptional cases
of refugees in immediate danger and refugees of compelling concern to the United
States, including former Aristide government officials, leaders of national and re-
gional political movements, human rights activists, and members of professions that
might be targets of persecution.
Following the May 24, 1992, Executive Order which resulted in the termination
of Guantanamo screening of Haitians, the program was expanded to permit any
Haitian who might fear persecution to apply tor U.S. refugee resettlement.
Consistent with President Clinton's January announcement of enhanced refugee
processing in Haiti, we expanded and improved the program. Additional refugee
processing facilities were established in Les Cayes and Cap Haitien to make the
program more accessible to Haitians in remote areas and additional measures were
implemented to ensure the quality and consistency of refugee adjudications.
With procedures in place to expedite the processing of those Haitians believed to
be at risk and to ensure applicants a full and fair opportunity for their claims to
be considered, we believe that the in-country program provides a viable means for
Haitians to seek the protection of the United States.
Let me now turn from our newest in-country program to our established pro-
grams, beginning with Cuba. After having completed the processing of long-term po-
litical prisoners, we expanded our program to permit other likely targets of persecu-
tion to apply for refugee status consideration in Havana. As with other populations,
we take first those persons who had received or were threatened with the most seri-
ous persecution. The caseload now includes Cubans who are former political pris-
oners, dissidents, religious and human rights activists, members of persecuted reli-
gious minorities, forced labor camp conscripts, and persons deprived of their profes-
sional credentials or subjected to disproportionately harsh or discriminatory treat-
ment resulting from their actual or perceived political or religious beliefs or activi-
ties. Our quarterly interview trips to Havana have been very productive; during
June of 1993, the most extensive circuit ride ever, nearly 2,000 Cubans were ap-
proved for admission to the United States. The expanded parameters, along with a
declining economic and political situation in Cuba, have resulted in increased inter-
est in the program.
As we enter the final stages of our program in the former Soviet Union, we are
encouraged by signs that democracy is taking hold and that many former Soviets
now have a greater degree of freedom at home. While the political and economic re-
forms are in progress, we continue to interview refugee applicants from the former
Soviet Union and, under the Lautenberg amendment, extended through the end of
fiscal year 1994, category approval rates in Moscow continue to exceed 95 percent.
The vast majority of appUcants interviewed in Moscow during fiscal year 1993 fit
into one of the four identified categories: Soviet Jews, EvangeUcal Christians,
Ukrainian Catholics and Ukrainian Orthodox. Their claims are adjudicated in ac-
cordance with the legislation's directive that a well-founded fear of persecution is
estabUshed by an assertion of a fear of persecution and assertion of a credible basis
for concern.
The INS workload in the Orderly Departure Program (ODP) in Vietnam consists
largely of former re-education camp detainees. Projections are that almost 26,000
refugees in this category will be admitted to the United States during fiscal year
1993. We will increase the interview rate of former detainees during the coming
year with the hope of completing interviews of eligible applicants by the end of fiscal
year 1995. As for the family reunification subprogram of the ODP, we support plans
for a transition to normal immigrant visa processing in Vietnam when relations be-
tween our countries are normalized.
During the year, we continued to work closely with the Department of State in
responding to the needs of a number of other refugee populations. At last year's
59
hearing, the previous Administration reported with satisfaction that democratic
changes in Eastern Europe had allowed us, for the first time, to find there was no
need to designate any nationalities in the region as being of special humanitarian
concern to the United States. Tragically, events in the former Yugoslavia created
a new refugee flow and persons from Bosnia-Herzegovina were added to the list of
those eligible to apply for U.S. resettlement. We at INS have moved qviickly to inter-
view this new population and have made expeditious circuit rides to various sites
to process former detention camp inmates, Bosnian Muslims with relatives in the
United States, and other vulnerable Bosnians referred by the United Nations High
Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).
In first asylvun countries in East Asia, we are finishing our interviews of the Viet-
namese caseload and continuing to process Hmong and Burmese in Thailand.
The United States continues to be part of an international effort to resettle Iraqis
who fled their country for Saudi Arabia following the Gulf War.
All cases referred to INS for resettlement consideration have been found by the
UNHCR to be refugees in need of resettlement. Although some of the Iraqis have
been military deserters, all of those approved by INS for refugee status fully satis-
fied the requirements of law and were found to have a well-founded fear of persecu-
tion on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particvilar socisil
group, or political opinion. The majority of the Iraqis who have been interviewed in
Saudi Arabia, both civilians and former military, participated in the uprising in
southern Iraq following the end of the war. Other Iraqis are interviewed at various
refugee processing posts.
In Airica, we have completed all Ethiopian processing in the Sudan and have
interviewed all of the eligible caseload of Liberians in West Airica. We continue to
interview large numbers of SomaUs in Kenya, giving priority to those with U.S. ties.
We are pleased to note that our efforts in Africa will result in the admission of near-
ly 7,000 refugees from the region.
The year ahead may present challenges not yet revealed to us. We at INS wish
to assure you that we stand ready to respond.
We endorse the overall refugee admissions ceiling of 121,000 and the regional ceil-
ings, as proposed by the President. These ceilings reflect the need for refugee reset-
tlement in ^e United States and demonstrate America's historic concern for easing
the human suffering of refugee populations.
Thank you. I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.
Senator SiMON. I would appreciate having that.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator KENNEDY. Thank you very much.
Senator Grassley?
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, A U.S.
SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF IOWA
EXTENT OF ANTI-SEMITISM IN RUSSIA
Senator Grassley. I will have questions to submit in writing,
but now, I'd like to follow upon the discussion which took place be-
tween you and Senator Simpson. I happen to agree with much of
what was said about change in the former Soviet Union, but all the
change hasn't been for the good. So could you describe for me the
nature and extent of anti-Semitism that exists in the former Soviet
Union, at least from your perspective?
Secretary CHRISTOPHER. Yes. My understanding is, Senator, that
there continues to be pockets of anti-Semitism in the Soviet Union,
and I am sorry to say that there is also some in Eastern Europe.
Before you came in perhaps. Senator, I said that this year we are
going to combine the categories of the former Soviet Union and
Eastern Europe, and anti-Semitism has reared its ugly head in
some of the countries of Eastern Europe as well as a continuation
in the Soviet Union, so those ugly problems are not behind us.
60
Senator Grassley. Just a little comment on the nature and ex-
tent. I mean, you said there are pockets. That may be the answer
to the extent part of it, but the nature of it, as you see it?
Secretary Christopher. Well, it so often springs from long, his-
torical reasons, just a hostility that has grown up over the years,
but a good deal of it is economically based. In instances where
there is success on the part of the Jewish individuals in a particu-
lar area, especially where there is great hardship on the part of the
others, that turns the population against them. I would say that
phenomenon seems to be more — I have seen more reports of that
in Eastern Europe than I have in the former Soviet Union. I think
in the former Soviet Union my understanding of it is it is largely
historical.
Senator Grassley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Kennedy. Senator Cohen?
involvement in BOSNIA
Senator COHEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, I was
going to ask you a question about the program that I believe the
State Department funds for the International Organization for Mi-
gration, the lOM, dealing with the evacuation of women and chil-
dren who are injured in the war in the former Yugoslavia. I will
submit that question for the record.
I just would like to make a comment, if I could, Mr. Chairman.
A Washington Post story yesterday indicated that you are person-
ally involved in the drafting of a Presidential decision directive
that would consider putting U.S. forces under a U.N. command for
peace-keeping missions in that area. I would simply recommend to
you that you come before the Congress, or urge the President to
come to the Congress, for consultations and support before any
such action is taken in that country.
Senator Kennedy. Thank you. Senator Specter, we have a vote
on. The Secretary has to leave at 3:30, so if you had one question
or
Senator COHEN. Could I just inquire whether silence is assent?
Secretary CHRISTOPHER. I didn't want to interrupt, but. Senator,
we certainly are prepared to do consultations with respect to that
Presidential decision memorandum. Indeed, I think some are com-
mencing this very day. We understand the responsibilities for con-
sultation and we will be going about it on a very urgent basis.
IRAQI REFUGEES
I wanted to avoid having me be responsible, as you suggested
Senator Simpson was for the prolongation of this, but since I am
talking, I might mention to you in response to one of your earlier
questions that the Iraqi soldiers who are coming here fall into two
categories from our standpoint. Senator.
First, there are people who were in the uprising against Saddam
or they were members of groups like the Kurds or the Shiites who
had been persecuted by Saddam, and I think we have been trying
very hard to screen out the kinds of individuals that you indicated
who fought against us in the war. So we are pretty conscious of the
61
factors that you mentioned and I wanted to add that to my prior
answer.
Senator Cohen. Are you also using Kuwaiti intelligence to verify
their roles?
Secretary Christopher. I am not sure that we are using Kuwaiti
intelligence, but I will reply to you on that more fully. A number
of different organizations, including the Red Cross and much U.S.
information, has been involved in the screening process.
Senator Kennedy. Senator Specter?
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ARLEN SPECTER, A U.S.
SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
WAR CRIMES TRIBUNAL
Senator Specter. Thank you, Mr, Chairman. I regret my late ar-
rival. I had other commitments. I will submit a series of questions
for the record, but in the couple of minutes left between now and
3:30, I would like to ask the Secretary about a matter which is on
the front burner of the U.N. unrelated to the refugee issue, except
indirectly, on the war crimes tribunal.
The foreign aid bill which is on the floor now has $3 million to
aid on the gathering of evidence which already is growing cold. The
administration has already been in support of the war crimes tribu-
nal, and I know that the Secretary and the administration are
doing what they can to push the matter ahead.
The question I have relates to an international criminal court
which would be on a permanent basis and would deal with matters
like international terrorism and international drug-dealing. I would
be interested to know how far along the administration is on for-
mulating a policy there and what might be expected by way of ad-
ministration support for a permanent international criminal court.
Secretary CHRISTOPHER. Senator, we have, as you indicate, been
very anxious to see the creation of a war crimes tribunal for the
former Yugoslavia, and we have been devoting a good deal of re-
sources and attention to that endeavor. I am glad to say that an
American was recently appointed as one of the judges on that
court.
As a general philosophical matter. Senator, I am in favor of the
concept that you mentioned and we are continuing to study it. We
will be focusing our attention, though, I would have to say, in the
next few months on trying to get the war crimes tribunal fully
staffed and begin to collect the evidence which, as you properly in-
dicate, may be disappearing if we don't do that very promptly.
But I would like to see in the longer term, as a philosophical
matter, that there be a general criminal court of that kind which
would have a powerful effect, I hope, on individuals who might
take the kind of action which subjects them to a war crimes tribu-
nal. For us to have to create one ad hoc brings a number of prob-
lems. On the other hand, the creation of one with a general juris-
diction, I think, is a long-term project, and I would hesitate to see
the importance of establishing one for the former Yugoslavia held
up while we sought the broader relief
Senator SPECTER. I thank the Secretary for the comment. Sen-
ator Dodd and I have succeeded with resolutions recently, and
79-707 0-94-3
62
some of our activities go back for some 7 years. There is a very
strong sense that had there been an international criminal court,
a terrorist like Abu Abbas might have been turned over to such a
court, where Egypt and then Italy and Yugoslavia refused to do so.
On Latin American drug dealers, countries like Colombia will not
turn over drug dealers to the United States, so I appreciate the
statement.
Senator Dodd and I were hoping that the President might find
a line or two in his U.N. speech to give a very strong United States
push to the war crimes tribunal and perhaps to the concept of an
international criminal court.
CONCLUDING COMMENTS
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Secretary, we have about 3 minutes left
before our time expires on the vote and then we have a series of
votes. We know you have to absent yourself. We are very, very
grateful to you for your presence.
I would invite questions to the other members of the panel. I
think we are going to have a series of votes. If there is the desire
of other members, we will reschedule the other panel members at
the convenience of the members of the committee or submit ques-
tions to the panel. I know you have to be excused.
Secretary Christopher. We will be glad, Mr. Chairman, to re-
spond to questions in writing.
Senator Kennedy. Senator Simpson?
Senator Simpson. I just want to thank you very much, and I do
want to direct some questions in writing, and particularly to Ms.
Limon, about the refugee resettlement issues and dependency rates
in California because you indicate in your testimony that things
are going pretty well in the Nation, but they aren't going very well
in California and California is where they all go, so they can't be
going too well in the Nation either. So if you could give me some
responses to that, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Kennedy. We have 100 Tibetans in Massachusetts and
there isn't one on welfare or unemployment compensation. It has
been one of the very moving, successful stories, as it has been in
other places.
We will all submit questions. Mr. Secretary, we are grateful to
you.
Secretary Christopher. Thank you very much.
[Whereupon, at 3:34 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]
APPENDIX
Exchange of Correspondence Relative to the Consultations
AND Presidential Determination on the Admission of Refu-
gees FOR 1994
&^d Washington, D.C. 20520
^fW
United States Department of Slate
Fashingion, D.C. 2052
SfBptember 20, lO^'S
Dear Mr. Chairman:
I know that members of the Subcommittee continue to be
interested in the progress being made on Indochinese
refucee issues. Jerry Tinker had informed us that one of
the goals of his trip to Bangkok was to look into the
timetable for completing processing of Vietnamese under
the Orderly Departure Program (ODP) . Since Jerry
unfortunately v;a3 unable: to maka the Lrip, J. thought the
Subcommittee might find useful the following update on ODP
In June of this year, we completed interviews of
Vietnamese Amerasians seeking admission to the United
States under the Mrazek Amendment. These individuals had
all been included on lists prepared by the Socialist
Republic of Vietnam (CRV) . As is often the case when the
end cf a program approaches, the percentage of
applications adjudicated in which fraud was present
increased dramatically. In order that U.S. admission
remain available to the small number of true Amerasians in
Vietnam who may in the future wish to seek admission to
the U.S., we are discussing with tlie SRV the modalities of
direct registration until such time as a U.S. consular
presence is reestabii.shed in Vietnam.
Former reeducation camp detainees comprise the single
largest refugee group processed under ODP, with some
26,000 admissions expected this fiscal year. We estimate
that soiT.e 70,000 former prisoners and accompanying family
members who meet the eligibility requirements - at least
three years in reeducation - remein in Vietnam. Under
current plans, the last members of this group will be
(63)
64
adrT>il.ted to the U.S. by the end of 1995. Interviews of a
small aroup of former employees of the U.S. Government or
U.S. coir.panies in Vietnam who are eligible for the program
number some 1 - 2,000 annually and should also be
completed within this timeframe.
Regarding the immigrant visa processing function which
ODP has performed for several years, it is our intention
that this responsibility will be assumed by a U.S.
Consulate once one is established inside Vietnam.
Currently it is difficult to predict when this step will
be taken.
I hope that this provides a useful summary of our
progress in resolving our outstanding commitments to
Vietnamese groups of particular concern to the United
States.
Sincerely,
Warren Zimmermann
Director
Bureau for Refugee Programs
The Honor able
Edwavd M. Kennedy, Chairman, .
Subcommittee on Immigration and Refugee Affairs,
Committee on the Judiciary,
United States Senate.
65
United States Department of State
Washington. D.C. 20520
OCT 8 1993
Dear Mr. Chairman:
I am pleased to provide you a copy of Presidential
Determination No. 94-1, signed and dated October 1, 1993,
entitled "Determination of FY 1994 Refugee Admissions Numbers
and Authorizations of In-Country Refugee Status Pursuant to
Section 207 and 101(a) (42), respectively, of the Immigration
and Nationality Act, and Determination Pursuant to Section
2(b)(2) of the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act, as
Amended". The Department of State has taken steps to have this
Determination published in the Federal Register .
The Administration greatly appreciated the bipartisan
cooperation received from your Office and the Committee during
the consultations process. We look forward to working with you
to address the issues raised during the consultations and to
continuing the productive relationship we have enjoyed in
advancing the important U.S. national interest in assisting
ref"vjees worldwide.
Sincerely,
Wendy R. Sherman
Assistant Secretary
Legislative Affairs
Enclosure: Presidential Determination No. 94-1
The Honorable
Edward M. Kennedy, Chairman,
Subcommittee on Immigration and Refugee Affairs,
Committee on the Judiciary,
United States Senate.
79-707 0-94-4
66
CDWAHO M KCNNtOr MASSACHOSmS
HOWARD M MCT2EN6AUM OMtO
OCNNIS OtCONClNI. A^liON*
rATKCH J llAMV VtRMONI
HOWfLL Hlfll« ALABAMA
PAUL SIMON. ILUNOIS
Hcnacirr kohlVisconsin
OlANNC »tlNST€IN. CAUfOftNIA
CAUCK. MOSkLCT*«AUH BJJXOlS
Uil„..C MATCH l/IAH
STMW THUXMOMO »OUlM CAKOllHA
ALAN i: SIMfSON WYOMINC
CHAAUS L CM-SSll" WWA
AKUN SrtCtta MNHSlriVANlA
HANK BROWN COLORADO
WIUJAM 5 COHEN MAINI
lyLRRY PRtSSLtR. SOUTH OAICOTA
CT«T>«A c ho<;a#. c*mt COUWttL
CAt>H««Nf W «H/«»lLi_ 11"' 0««(CTO"
HAM A 0«LIA M*NORrrT |T*/» W«CTO«
■HOON KlOtI »— OOITY CH«1 COUHJtL
The President
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear Mr. President-
Under the provisions of The Re
(P.L. 96-212), members of the Commi
consulted with your representative,
Christopher, on the proposed admiss
year 1994.
We are particularly gratified
taken steps necessary to assure tha
of refugees more accurately matches
As you probably know, over the past
Committee has expressed its concern
level of refugee admissions accompa
funding levels adequate to meet the
refugees admitted.
United States Senate
COMMirrEE ON THE JUDICIARY
WASHINGTON. DC 205 10-6275
September 27, 199 3
fugee Act of 1980
ttee on the Judiciary have now
Secretary of State Warren
ions of refugees for fiscal
that your Administration has
t funding for the resettlement
the numbers to be admitted.
several consultations the
over the continuing high
nied by a failure to provide
resettlement needs of the
This sard, we remain concerned that current funding
levels — approximately eight months of federal reimbursement —
still fall short of actual needs. We would urge the
Administration to move towards an assistance program of at least
12 months, through reforms and other savings like those
envisioned in the refugee reauthorization bill this Committee
reported favorably to the Senate in the 102nd Congress (S. 1941,
Report 102-316, July 2, 1992).
In addition, the Committee is gratified to learn of the
Administration's commitment to end the "pipeline" of in-country
processing which has developed over recent years — to shift this
flow to more appropriate immigrant-related preferences — and to
reserve refugee admission numbers for those truly in need of
immediate resettlement to avoid persecution or threat to life and
safety. The Committee will continue to monitor progress in this
area over the coming year.
The Committee continues to support the objectives of our
Nation's program to assist refugees of "special humanitarian
concern" to the United States, and we accept your proposals to do
so during the coming fiscal year.
With best wishes.
Orrin G .' Hatch
Ranking Member
Commit>ee on the
JiVjfic/ary
>imf
Ranking" Member
Subcommittee o.' Immigration
and Refugee Al fairs
Sincerfely
Joseph R. Biden, Jr.
Chairman
Committee on the
jdJ
Subcommittee • on Immigration
and Refugee Affairs
67
THE WHITE HOUSE
WAS H I NGTON
October 1, 1993
Presidential Determination
No. 94-1
MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF STATE
SUBJECT: Determination of FY 1994 Refugee Admissions
Numbers and Authorizations of In-Country Refugee
Status Pursuant to Section 207 and 101(a) (42),
Respectively, of the Immigration and Nationality
Act, and Determination Pursuant to Section 2(b)(2)
of the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act, as
Amended
In accordance with Section 207 of the Immigration and
Nationality Act ("the Act") (8 U.S.C. 1157), and after
appropriate consultation with the Congress, I hereby make the
following determinations and authorize the following actions:
The admission of up to 121,000 refugees to the United
States during FY 1994 is justified by humanitarian concerns
or is otherwise in the national interest; provided, however,
that this number shall be understood as including persons
admitted to the United States during FY 1994 with Federal
refugee resettlement assistance under the Amerasian
immigrant admissions program, as provided below.
The 120,000 funded admissions shall be allocated among
refugees of special humanitarian concern to the United
States as described in the documentation presented to
the Congress during the consultations that preceded this
determination and in accordance with the following regional
allocations; provided, however, that the number allocated to
the East Asia region shall include persons admitted to the
United States during FY 1994 with Federal refugee resettle-
ment assistance under Section 584 of the Foreign Operations,
Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act of
1988, as contained in Section 101(e) of Public Law 100-202
(Amerasian immigrants and their family members); provided
further that the number allocated to the former Soviet Union
shall include persons admitted who were nationals of the
former Soviet Union, or in the case of persons having no
nationality, who were habitual residents of the former
Soviet Union, prior to September 2, 1991:
Africa 7,000
East Asia 4 5, 000
Former Soviet Union/Eastern Europe 55,000
Near East/South Asia 6,000
Latin America/Caribbean 4 , 000
Unallocated (funded) 3,000
The 3,000 unallocated federally funded numbers shall be
allocated as needed. Unused admissions numbers allocated
68
to a particular region within the 120,000 federally funded
ceiling may be transferred to one or more other regions if
there is an overriding need for greater numbers for the
region or regions to which the numbers are being trans-
ferred. .You are hereby authorized and directed to consult
with the judiciary committees of the Congress prior to any
such use of the unallocated numbers or reallocation of
numbers from one region to another.
Pursuant to Section 2(b)(2) of the Migration and Refugee
Assistance Act of 1962, as amended, 22 U.S.C. 2601(b)(2),
I hereby determine that assistance to or on behalf of
persons applying for admission to the United States as part
of the overseas refugee admissions program will contribute
to the foreign policy interests of the United States and
designate such persons for this purpose.
The 1,000 privately funded admissions are not designated
for any country or region and may be used for refugees of
special humanitarian concern to the United States from any
region provided that private resources are available to fund
the reasonable cost of their admission and resettlement.
An additional 10,000 refugee admissions numbers shall
be made available during FY 1994 for the adjustment to
permanent resident status under Section 209(b) of the Act
(8 U.S.C. 1159(b)) of aliens who have been granted asylum
in the United States under Section 208 of the Act (8 U.S.C.
1158), as this is justified by humanitarian concerns or is
otherwise in the national interest. An estimated 7,000
aliens were granted asylum during FY 1993 under Section
208 of the Act.
In accordance with Section 101(a) (42) of the Act (8 U.S.C.
1101(a) (42)) and after appropriate consultation with the
Congress, I also specify that, for FY 1994, the following
persons may, if otherwise qualified, be considered refugees
for the purpose of admission to the United States within
their countries of nationality or habitual residence:
a. Persons in Vietnam.
b. Persons in Cuba.
c. Persons in Haiti.
d. Persons in the former Soviet Union.
You are authorized and directed to report this Determination
to the Congress immediately and to publish it in the Federal
Register .
cc: The Attorney General
The Secretary of Health and Human Services
69
Questions and Answers
Questions for Secretary of State Warren Christopher Submitted by
Senator Kennedy
Question 2: Amerasian "Pipeline" from Vietnam: What total niimber of aliens
under the Amerasian program (Amerasians and family members together) will be
processed in fiscal year 94 and in fiscal year 95? What date has been fixed to termi-
nate this program?
Answer: The bulk of Amerasian interviews were completed in March 1993. How-
ever, as it can take three to six months after the interview for an approved case
to depart Vietnam, and because until this month all Amerasian cases have been en-
rolled in a five month ESL/CO course in the Philippines en route to the U.S., most
of those approved in fiscal year 93 will not arrive in the U.S. until fiscal year 94.
11,675 Amerasians and family members were admitted in fiscal year 93. We are
projecting only about 3,500 admissions under the program in fiscal year 94, mostly
of persons approved in fiscal year 93. Large-scale processing of this caseload has
been completed, and we anticipate admitting no more than a few hundred persons
under this program in fiscal year 95.
However, no date has been set for the "termination" of the Amerasian program,
per se, as there is no expiration date set in the legislation creating the program.
We are exploring alternate methods for registration of Amerasians in this program
whereby prospective applicants will not have to go through SRV officials, in order
to ensure that ODP is as accessible to the remaining caseload as possible. It is pos-
sible that we could have a few hundred admissions per year for several more years
via this scaled-down system.
Question 3: Broadening the Geographic Reach of the U.S. Refugee program: What
are the Department's thoughts about the shape of the refugee program for the fu-
ture? Have you considered working more closely with UNHCR and using consular
officers to broaden the reach of the program?
Answer: We agree wholeheartedly with the observation that the refugee resettle-
ment program must evolve to meet changing needs. As the Indochinese and Former
Soviet Union programs begin to wind down and move toward immigrant visa oper-
ations over the next few years, we will be able to divert resources to processing more
diverse groups of refugees around the globe. To this end, we already have begun
working with UNHCR to assist vulnerable refugees in need of resettlement, espe-
cially in Africa, and are working to make our refugee officers and cooperating vol-
untary agencies more flexible in resettlement operations. Further, an interagency
review process already has been initiated within the government to explore changes
in refugee policies needed to meet new developments in the world refugee situation.
A useful step toward making the resettlement program more flexible and respon-
sive to the needs of vulnerable refugees in far-flung locations would be authorizing
consular officers to adjudicate refugee applications where INS officers are not sta-
tioned and cannot visit in a timely fashion, as is proposed in S. 1197. The Depart-
ment supports this proposal, and the Bureaus for Consular Affairs and for Refugee
Programs are ready to work together to perform this important function.
Questions for Secretary of State Warren Christopher Submitted by
Senator Simpson
Question: There has been a lot of controversy lately about the resettlement of
Iraqi refugees in the United States. I've had many letters from Wyoming asking
why the U.S. would even consider providing refugee benefits to Iraqis who had
fought against Americans in the Persian Gulf War.
In your testimony you said that these Iraqi refugees have documented "credible
accounts of torture and abuse" and that it is unlikely that any Iraqi refugee reset-
tled in the U.S. has ever taken up arms against the U.S.
Please provide a more detailed description of who these refugees are, what types
of persecution they justifiably fear, and what is the breakdovra of those admitted-
how many are former Iraqi soldiers, accompanying family members, religious mi-
norities, or other identifiable categories.
Answer:
HOW THE refugees CAME TO BE IN SAUDI ARABIA
Towards the end of the Gulf War in March 1991, thousands of miUtary deserters
and civilians rose up against Saddam Hussein in various cities throughout southern
Iraq. The uprising ("intifada"), which had been encouraged by the U.S., failed after
70
three weeks when outside assistance did not materialize and, according to the refu-
gees, because of Saddam's superior forces and reported use of chemical weapons.
About 9-10,000 defeated Iraqi rebels then fled to the safety of Coalition Hnes. They
were taken by Coalition Forces into Saudi Arabia and interned with about 79,000
Iraqis taken in battle during Desert Storm and earlier line-crossers and deserters
from Desert Shield. All were arbitrarily designated "enemy prisoners of war"
(EPWs) and held in Artawiyah, a former prison camp, in Saudi Arabia.
After the cease fire, the Internationeil Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) ar-
ranged for the repatriation of 75,000 of the inmates of the camp. All 9-10,000 rebels
refused to repatriate for fear of reprisals by the Saddam regime, as did 4,000 ex-
soldiers. Faced with an unprecedented number of Geneva Convention Category III
internees ("prisoners of war") who refused repatriation, the ICRC reasoned that the
"intifada EPWs" could be recategorized as Geneva Convention Category IV "dis-
placed civilians," and that these EPWs should never have been listed as 'EPWs" in
the first place. EPWs who refused to repatriate were declared to be "displaced per-
sons" in late August 1991 and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
(UNHCR) subsequently recognized them as refugees.
During the "intifada" uprising, about 22-25,000 civilian families fled to Coalition
Forces for safety. They were given refuge in the southern Iraqi city of Safwan. When
Coalition Forces withdrew from southern Iraq, Saudi Arabia reluctantly agreed to
accept the 22-25,000 Iraqi civilian refugees. (King Fahd had received a personal re-
quest from President Bush, delivered by Secretary of State Baker, to accept these
people, on a temporary basis, until the expected imminent fall of Saddeim.) They
were transported by U.S. military forces to a makeshift camp at Raflia, a town in
northern Saudi Arabia near the Iraq border.
HOW THE REFUGEES ARE BEING RESETTLED
The Government of Saudi Arabia expended millions of dollars in building a camp
at Rafha, equipped with hospitals, clinics, schools and a branch of the university.
Upon its completion in late 1992, the former "EPWs" were moved from their spartan
quarters at Artawiyah to Rafha. The initial camp population at that point was about
35-39,000 refugees, as follows:
22-25,000 civiUans.
9-10,000 rebels.
4,000 ex-soldiers.
In early 1992, when it had become clear that conditions in Iraq precluded the safe
return of many of these Iraqis, UNHCR concluded that other solutions, such as re-
settlement in third countries, must be found. The U.S. responded immediately by
offering resettlement to a small group of high-risk refugees who had been helpful
to the U.S. miUtary in the waning days of the war. There was also some resettle-
ment of Iraqi refUgees to Iran and some voluntary and involuntary repatriation, so
that by May 1992 the camp population was about 32,000.
UNHCR has continued its resettlement campaign with increased efforts beginning
in August 1992. By July 1993, there were 28,000 refugees remaining in Raftia. With
expected reductions due to resettlement, the camp population should be down to
about 23,500 by the end of 1993. During fiscal year 92 and fiscal year 93, the U.S.
has resettled a total of about 3,000 Iraqis from Raftia. Other countries participating
in the resettlement effort include Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Iran, Finland, the
U.K., Australia, Pakistan and Syria. Barring changes inside Iraq, UNHCR expects
continued resettlement will be needed for this group in 1994 and beyond.
WHO IS THE U.S. TAKING AND HOW MANY
In fiscal year 92, the U.S. resettled 3,442 Iraqi refugees worldwide. The majority
of these were civilians processed in Turkey, Athens and other European posts. Only
956 were from the camps in Saudi Arabia, and of these only 300 were Iraqi rebels,
ex-soldiers, and their family members. (We do not have a breakdown of their mili-
tary service.)
In fiscal year 93 the U.S. has admitted about 4,600 Iraqis under refugee criteria.
The breakdown is:
Some 2,500 are civihans processed in Turkey, Greece and other European
countries.
Approximately 1,470 are civilians from refugee camps in Saudi Arabia. These
are mostly Shiites who fled after the failed uprising against Saddam Hussein
in the south of Iraq. 453 are ex-soldiers who left their military units inside Iraq
before being mobilized to the Kuwaiti front and who then hid inside Iraq. None
71
of them ever went to Kuwait. 425 of these also participated in the rebellion
against Saddam following the ceasefire in March 1991.
A further 80 ex-soldiers were ethnic and religious minorities (Ass3nrian Chris-
tians, Chaldean Catholics, Kurds, Turkomen and others) who believed Saddam
was pursuing a plan to exterminate such groups.
110 are family members accompanying the ex-soldiers.
For fiscal year 94, UNHCR has asked the U.S. to take 3,000 Iraqi refugees from
Saudi Arabia. We have no objection to the spirit of the Sense of the Senate Resolu-
tion, that is, prohibiting soldiers who fought U.S. troops from being admitted to the
U.S. as refugees. We believe that our admission of Iraqi refugees already meets that
general criterion. Although we have admitted as refugees Iraqis who were soldiers
between August 2, 1990 and February 29, 1991, to our knowledge none of them ever
fired on U.S. troops. However, some Iraqi refugees are reporting that their reception
in this country is being adversely affected by the sentiment behind the resolution.
Nonetheless, we advised the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees Mrs. Ogata on
August 31 of the depth of Congressional concern over this issue and asked that
UNHCR consider whether it could refer Iraqi ex-soldiers to other resettlem.ent coun-
tries, instead of the U.S. However, we believe that some applicants who may have
been members of the Iraqi military between the dates contained in the Senate reso-
lution may qualify for refugee admission to the U.S. based on a well-founded fear
of persecution, and we prefer to leave INS free to determine on a case-by-case basis
whether an applicant meets U.S. admission criteria.
The FBI has also expressed its concern over the admission of Iraqis who served
in Saddam's military who may be potential terrorists. Each approved refugee over
the age of 16 undergoes a routine FBI security check before arriveil in the U.S., and
we understand that the FBI has made arrangements to selectively interview Iraqis
refugees from Saudi Arabia upon their arrival by charter flight at JFK.
TYPES OF PERSECUTION THEY JUSTIFIABLY FEAR
Following are eight case histories of Iraqi refugees, some of whom were former
soldiers, who have been resettled in the U.S. Most have been deteiined, imprisoned,
tortured, had family members executed, or fear reprisal for participation in the
March 1991 failed uprising.
Case A is a 31-year-old married medical technician. He is not sure if his wife is
alive. He is an Assyrian Christian. In 1973 his uncle was executed by the Iraqi gov-
ernment for his anti-government political views. In 1983 he was detained, ques-
tioned, and tortured by the government for reftising to join the Popular Army. He
was released but did not join the Popular Army. In 1984 he was again detained by
the government for refusing to join the Popular Army. A's brother was imprisoned
by the government from 1984 to 1989 for involvement in anti-government political
activities. His brother was tortured while in prison. A was forced to join the Iraqi
army in November 1987 fearing that the government would kill his brother if he
did not join. While in the army A served as a medical technician. In March 1990
his commanding officers ordered him to monitor executions (checking bodies to make
sure that the persons executed were dead). He refused and was imprisoned in a
military facility until June 1990 and then released back into his position as a medi-
cal technician. In late August 1990 his unit was mobilized to Kuwait. A declares
that as a medical professional dedicated to healing people he could not participate
in the invasion of Kuwait. After crossing the Iraqi border into Kuwait he took the
first opportunity to escape from the Iraqi army. This was September 2, 1990. He
crossed into Saudi Arabia and sought refuge. In June 1991, while in a refugee camp,
he was interviewed by Voice of America. He described the horrors of Uving in Iraa
and denounced Saddam Hussein. He fears that if he were returned to Iraq he would
be killed by the government for his previous politicsd opinions and activities and his
defection at the time of his mobilization to Kuwait.
Case B is a 23-year-old single construction worker. He is a Kurd. In March 1988
Saddam Hussein ordered the bombing of B's Kurdish village. lUegsd chemical weap-
ons were used. All of B's immediate family, his p£U"ents, three brothers and sister,
were killed after suffering the tortuous effects of mustard gas. B survived. He had
just turned 18 years old. Outraged at the Iraqi government's killing of his family
and the attempt to exterminate the Kurds, B openly criticized the government. For
his political opposition he was imprisoned by the government for 10 months and tor-
tured. He was released from prison and wrced to join the army under threat of
death. He served as a private. His unit was ordered to Kuwait in January 1991.
In opposition to the invasion and because of the suffering of his people, B deserted
from nis unit in early February 1991. He made his way to Hafer AJ Baten, Saudi
72
Arabia, where he sought refuge with Coalition Forces. He beUeves he will be exe-
cuted by the Iraqi government if he returns to Iraq.
Case C is a 45-year-old married female. She is accompanied by two of her five
children, ages 16 and 10. During the uprising her husband and three of her sons,
age 19 (in hiding from the draft), age 17, and age 14 went out to join the rebels
fighting in the city. She remained at home with ner 16-year-old daughter and 10-
year-old son. As the uprising began to fail they did not return. She went out to look
for her husband and children. C found her 14-year-old tied to a fence crucifixion
style and shot to death. A sign had been placed next to his body by government
forces stating that this was an example of what would happen to all anti-govern-
ment rebels. Fearing that the government knew of her family's participation in the
uprising, C decided to give up her search for the other missing family members and
to seek reftige for herself and her remeiining children with Coalition Forces. She was
brought to Saudi Arabia in April 1991. She fears she will be executed if she returns
to Iraq. She believes her husband and other two sons are dead.
Case D is a 37-year-old male. He is married and believes his wife and his four
children, ages 7, 6, 4, and 2 to be alive. In 1980 D along with his father and brother
were imprisoned without trial by the Iraqi government Tor their anti-government po-
litical opinions. D was held for five years. Throughout his imprisonment he was tor-
tured — beatings, electric shock, and extraction of three of his fingernails. In 1985
he was released from prison but his father and brother remained imprisoned, their
location unknown. Upon his release D was forced to join the army. He served as
a private. During his three-week home leaves every six weeks to two months he
would support his family by doing electrical jobs. D deserted from the army upon
the invasion of Kuwait and went into hiding. He participated in the anti-govern-
ment uprising hoping to free his country from Saddam Hussein. When it failed he
escaped with one brother and two cousins who also participated in the uprising.
They sought refuge with Coalition Forces assisting the rebels and were brought to
Saudi Arabia in April 1991. D has not seen his wi^e and children since the uprising.
The whereabouts of his imprisoned father and brother are still unknown, but D be-
lieves them to be dead. D fears that he will be executed if he returns to Iraq for
his participation in the anti-government uprising.
Case E is a 23-year-old single male. He was drafted into the Iraqi army in July
1988 and served as a private until December 1989. From December 1989 to March
1991 E was imprisoned in a military intelligence detention facility for withholding
information about his brother's political opposition party activities. His brother haa
been detained and executed in 1987 by the government for suspicion of being an
opposition party member. E was released from the military detention facility by
anti-government rebels during the uprising. E participated in the uprising and when
it failed soiight refuge with Coalition Forces. He was brought to Saudi Arabia in
April 1991. E is afraid to return to Iraq. He believes he will be executed by the gov-
ernment for his participation in the anti-government uprising and his family's nis-
tory of political opposition.
Case F is a 43-year-old married medical technician. He is accompanied by his 34-
year-old wife, their two sons, ages 15 and 5, and his brother age 22. His wife is a
Erimary school teacher and his brother is an auto mechanic. In 1973 one of his
rothers was executed by the government for writing anti-government poetry. In
1979 F was drafted into the army where he served in the medical corps as a private.
In 1979 he was arrested for writing an anti-government tract and imprisoned. While
in prison he was tortured by electro-shock, hung from the ceiling upside down for
long periods of time, and had acid poured on his hands and right leg (he has acid
burn scars). He was released after fours years in 1983 and was forced to join the
army until his discharge in 1989. In January 1991 F was recalled to the army for
service in Kuwait but he did not report as ordered. During the uprising, F and his
brother drove an ambulance and broadcasted anti-government literature on the am-
bulance loudspeaker. They fought against the Iraqi army as it entered the city.
When the bombing became too severe F fled with his wife, children, and brother to
seek refuge with Coalition Forces. They were brought to Saudi Arabia in April 1991.
F and his family believe they will be executed by the government if they return to
Iraq. Friends told him that they had seen his photograph posted by the government
and that he was sentenced to death for participation in the uprising, One of his
wife's brothers who participated in the uprising was detained by the army and is
presumed to be dead.
Case G is a 26-year-old single male electronic technician. In May 1986 he was
drafted into the army and served as a private until he deserted in July 1990. G de-
serted from the army because he feared he would be killed by the government. Prior
to his desertion he was routinely interrogated and beaten by his commanding offi-
cers because they wanted information about the anti-government political activities
73
of two of his cousins. These two cousins had been executed by the government in
1988 for their political activities. G went into hiding until his three-week participa-
tion in the anti-government uprising. When the uprising failed he sought refuge
promised by Coalition Forces. He was brought to Saudi Arabia in April 1991. G is
afraid to return to Iraq because of his participation in the uprising and because of
his cousins' executions. He beUeves he will be executed if he returns. Case H is a
38-year-old married civil engineer. He is accompanied by his 38-year-old wife and
their four children ages 9, twins 7, and 4. In 1980 H was drafted into the army and
served in the rank of private as a surveyor until 1990. He hated being in the army.
In 1982 his brother was executed by the government for making an anti-government
joke in college. In 1989 another brother was executed for deserting the army. His
brother had deserted for anti-government political reasons. His family was con-
stantly under surveillance by government authorities because of their anti-govern-
ment political views. In January 1991 H was again drafted for mihtary service but
refused to report for duty and hid. He participated in the anti -government uprising
for three weeks. When the uprising failed he and his wife and children fled seeking
protection with Coalition Forces. They were brought to Saudi Arabia in May 1991.
H beUeves he and his family will be executed for his participation in the uprising.
Questions for Secretary of State Warren Christopher Submitted by the
Senate Judiciary Committee
Question 1: (a) Does the administration feel that significant anti-Semitic activity
persists in the former Soviet Union?
Answer: Unlike the Soviet Government, the central governments of the new inde-
pendent states (NIS) of the former Soviet Union (FSU) do not officially support anti-
Semitism. Russian officials have denounced anti-Semitism publicly on several occa-
sions, most notably following publication of a virulently anti-Semitic article in Prav-
da on May 6, 1993. Similarly, the Russian Government has ended the Soviet Gov-
ernment's prohibition of emigration by Jews. Record numbers of Jews have left the
FSU in recent years, inclu(£ng approximately 100,000 during 1992. The Russian
Government is working with us to develop bureaucratic and legal mechanisms that
will guarantee the right of free emigration to all Russian citizens.
At the same time, anti-Semitic views are still held by many individual citizens
of the NIS. Over the past year, we have received scattered reports of cemetery dese-
crations and synagogue vandalism committed by individuals. During the events of
late September and early October in Moscow, many of President Yeltsin's opponents
voiced anti-Semitic slogans. Newspapers opposed to President Yeltsin have also car-
ried anti-Semitic articles. While we have not been able to confirm any reports of
Jews being singled out as targets of violence, we are concerned that such attacks
could occur if economic conditions worsen and Jews are identified as scapegoats. In
addition, ethnic conflicts in Georgia, Nagorno-Karabakh, Tajikistan, and Russia's
Northern Caucasus aggravate ethnic prejudices, thereby increasing the likelihood of
violence and other forms of discrimination against Jews and other minority groups.
We have repeatedly stressed the importance of fighting anti-Semitism and all
forms of discrimination in our contacts with NIS governments. While these govern-
m.ents have voiced their agreement with our message, it will take time to build tol-
erance in societies in which anti-Semitism is deeply embedded.
Question 1: (b) Is there anti-Semitic activity by provincial and local governments
or state-owned factories? Will you not reduce numbers until this is resolved?
Answer: While national governments in the NIS no longer sponsor anti-Semitism,
many citizens of the NIS, including officials of factories and provincial and local gov-
ernments, continue to hold anti-Semitic views.
In fiscal year 94 the refugee admissions program for former Soviets will function
as it does currently, with approximately 50,000 admissions expected. Once the exist-
ing backlog of qualified cases has been eliminated, and barring any significant dete-
rioration in conditions for those groups in the FSU, we expect that this program will
move in the direction of normal immigration.
Questions for Secretary of State Warren Christopher Submitted by
Senator Grassley
Question 2: Does the Administration intend to continue to require persons inter-
viewing for refugee status in the Former Soviet Union to travel to Moscow for their
interview?
Answer: All refugee interviews in the Former Soviet Union will continue to be con-
ducted in Moscow. Neither the Department of State nor the INS is in a position to
74
devote more people or funding to this already large program. Establishing new of-
fices would draw down seriously on finite resources and would have the effect of di-
minishing and slowing down processing in Moscow. In addition, the number of cases
from the other republics is relatively smadl. For more than a year we have been ex-
pediting departures from the "hot" republics such as Georgia, Tajikistan and the
other Central Asian republics.
Question 3: Does the Administration believe that notifying prospective refugees by
mail of their interview dates is hindered by the civil strife in the former Soviet
Union?
Answer: The Washington Processing Center (WPC) advises applicants and their
relatives in the U.S. of the interview dates three months in advance. We know that
many relatives in the U.S. notify their family members in the former Soviet Union
directlv of their interview dates.
While we have received indications that mail delivery in some of the most turbu-
lent areas is not always dependable, we do not beUeve that there are many persons
who are unaware of their interview dates. There has been no change in the "no
show" rate over the past several years, and the vast majority of the appUcants, who
are from Russia and the Ukraine, receive mail without hindrance.
Question 6: (a) Are refugees having difficulty in applying for refugee status at
ODP?
Answer: Persons meeting the processing criteria for the regular, Amerasian, and
former re-education camp detainee sub-programs of the Orderly Departure program
in general do not appear to be facing any unusual difficvilties in applying for refugee
status. This is not to sav, of course, that prospective applicants do not sometimes
experience obstacles ancf delays in working through the SRV side of the system.
However, once they appear on an SRV list of persons approved for the program, the
process goes forward smoothly. In some instances, such as that of a Vietnamese
Montagpard woman applicant who was prevented from entering the ODP processing
site, ODP officers have intervened with the SRV side to resolve the matter. We con-
tinue to press the SRV side for unhindered access by qualified Montagnards to ODP.
Further, we succeeded this year in negotiating a revision of procedures whereby 30
percent of the former reeducation camp detainee applicants interviewed by ODP
each month will be proposed for interview by the U.S. side on a "longest-held, first-
processed" basis, ratner than selected through the traditional SRV list method.
Question 6: (b) Do refugees applying for refugee status at ODP have difficulty in
finding out whether their files are complete and ready for review?
Answer: It appears that the process by which ODP proposes a case for interview
to the SRV side, and the SRV working group in turn notifies the applicant, is work-
ing reasonably well, allowing for vagaries in the SRV mail system or applicants hav-
ing moved from their addresses of record. In addition, refugee applicants and their
families are able to write to ODP in Bangkok for status reports, and the Bureau
for Refugee Programs in Washington, with its Unk to the ODP data base, also pro-
vides a telephone information service to provide up-to-date case status reports to
families and Congressional offices.
Question 7: What measures can be done to improve ODP to make sure refugees
are given a fair and thorough review?
Answer: We are satisfied that each case already is given every consideration, in-
cluding a fair and thorough review.
Question 8: What criticisms have been made internally about ODP?
Answer: Actual processing under ODP is going quite smoothly, with a regular ex-
change of information and observations between ODP/Bangkok and the Department
which results in modifications to operations as needed. Thus, there is little "internal
criticism," per se, of the process. On the other hand, there exists some debate over
long-term plans for ODP, with some believing that eligibility criteria should be
broadened to include more persons, but with most understanding that it is nec-
essary for the program to evolve over the next year into an immigration program
consistent with Department of State standards. To this end, the Department, in co-
ordination with INS, already has begun to take steps to plan for the eventual transi-
tion of the family reunification program of ODP into an immigrant visa program.
Question 9: If a Vietnamese suffered an entire year in a reeducation camp would
he or she be eligible to be admitted as a refugee?
Answer: No. The former reeducation detainee program requires that the applicant
have been detained for at least three years. Some 80,000 persons already have been
admitted under this program. Our experience is that this was the minimum time
served by mid-level ARVN officers (captains and up) and pre- 1975 civil servants.
Even by Umiting the program in this manner, we estimate that there are about
70,000 applicants, including family members, remaining to be interviewed. The only
persons with only one year of reeducation time who are eligible at this time for the
75
program are those who also were employed by the U.S. Government or a U.S. pri-
vate organization for at least one year, or who received training in the U.S. under
USG auspices.
Question 11: There has been a great deal of discussion about the Iraqi refugees
recently admitted into the U.S. Recently the Senate passed a resolution questioning
this policy of admitting former Iraqi soldiers as refugees and you mention them in
your opening statement.
You stated that "many" of these refugees were politically persecuted or were re-
sistance fighters, (a) What percentage of those admitted were in these categories?
(b) How many more will be admitted? (c) Could they have been admitted into the
U.S. without providing refugee benefits? (d) Were there any agreements made for-
mally or informally with foreign governments which resulted in the Executive
Branch proposal to admit Iraqi refugees? If so, what were those agreements?
Answer:
(A) WHAT PERCENTAGE WERE POLITICALLY PERSECUTED OR WERE RESISTANCE
FIGHTERS?
All persons admitted to the U.S. under Section 207 of the Immigration and Na-
tionality Act have been determined by the Immigration and Naturalization Service,
based on individual personal interviews of all persons over the age of 16, to meet
the definition of "refugee" contained in Section 101(a)(42) of the same Act, which
is quoted below:
The term "refugee" means (A) any person who is outside any country of such
person's nationality * * * and who is unable or unwilling to return to, and is
unable or unwilUng to avedl himself or herself of the protection of, that country
because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race,
reUgion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opin-
ion ♦ ♦ *. The term "refugee" does not include any person who ordered, incited,
assisted, or otherwise participated in the persecution of any person on account
of race, reUgion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or politi-
cal opinion.
All Iraqi refugees admitted to the U.S. have experienced persecution or have a
well-founded fear of persecution. Secretary Christopher stated in his testimony be-
fore the Senate Judiciary Committee on September 23 that, in addition, manv have
credible accounts of torture and abuse. Eight such case histories are attached. Also,
the deserters actively opposed the regime and many of them participated in the
failed uprising in March 1991. Many of those who deserted or surrendered were
members of persecuted ethnic or religious minority groups. Statistics follow:
4,600 approximate number of Iraqi refugees admitted to the U.S. in fiscal
year 93;
2,041 number of Iraqi refugees admitted from Saudi Arabia in fiscal year 93;
533 number of Iraqi refugees from Saudi Arabia who were ex-soldiers, of
whom:
453 deserted inside Iraq before being mobilized to Kuwait, with 425 partici-
pating in the failed uprising; and
80 deserted inside Kuwait, all of whom were members of persecuted ethnic
or religious minority groups (Ass3^an Christians, Chaldean Catholics, Kurds,
Turkomen and others) and who believed Saddam was pursuing a plan to exter-
minate such groups.
Therefore, 26 percent of the Iraqis admitted from Saudi Arabia were former sol-
diers, 80 percent of whom were resistance fighters, 5 percent experienced general
political persecution, and 15 percent were members of persecuted ethnic or religious
minorities.
(B) HOW MANY MORE WILL BE ADMITTED?
Most Iraqis who fled the Gulf War into Turkey have already been resettled in
third countries, and many who fled into Europe have been offered asylum or are
awaiting interviews from resettlement countries (including the U.S.). The largest re-
sidual population of Iraqi refugees for whom there is no alternative to resettlement
is in Saudi Arabia. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees has asked
the United States to resettle 3,000 Iraqi refugees from Saudi Arabia in fiscal year
94, and has received pledges from other countries to resettle up to 3,600 more. In-
cluding applicants from Turkey and Europe, we expect to resettle about 4,500 Iraqis
in the U.S. as refugees in fiscal year 94.
76
Assuming that the percentage of civilians to soldiers in fiscal year 94 is similar
to that in fiscal year 93, about 780 of those resettled from Saudi Arabia may be
former soldiers. They will have the same history of persecution and meet the same
rigorous criteria as those admitted in fiscal year 93. Because fewer Iraqis will be
admitted from Turkey and Europe, the percentage of former soldiers to the total
population of Iraqi refugee entrants will increase, from 12 percent in fiscal year 93
to 17 percent in fiscal year 94.
(C) PROVISION OF REFUGEE BENEFITS
Persons already in the U.S. who have a well-founded fear of persecution should
they return to their country may apply for asylum. Aliens outside of the U.S. may
apply for visas to visit temporarily, usually for a stay of up to six months. Or thev
may apply for immigrant visas if they fit certain emplu /ment or family criteria. Ref-
ugee benefits are not available to any of the above persons.
By law [8 CFR 207.1(d)], "any applicant for refugee status who qualifies as an im-
mediate relative or special immigrant shall not be processed as a refugee unless it
is in the public interest * * *. An applicant who may be eligible for classification
under section 203(a)(1), (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), or (7) of the [Immigration and National-
ity] Act, and for whom a visa number is now available, shall be advised of such eli-
gibility but is not required to apply [for the immigrant visa]." None of the Iraqis
in Saudi Arabia admitted as refugees qualified as an immediate relative or special
immigrant. Of the 1,037 approved by INS in fiscal year 92 (not all arrived in fiscal
year 92) 71 fell into a family immigrant category for whom a visa number was not
available. Of the 2,144 approved by INS in fiscal year 93 (not all arrived in fiscal
year 93), 68 fell into a family immigrant category for whom a visa number was not
available. Therefore, there was no alternative but for admission as a refugee, which
entitles the entrant to receive refugee benefits.
(D) AGREEMENTS WITH FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS
There were no agreements, formal or informal, with any foreign governments
which resulted in the admission of Iraqi refugees to the U.S. Iraqi has been a des-
ignated nationality for the U.S. refugee program since the passing of the Refugee
Act of 1980. From fiscal year 80 through the end of fiscal year 93, we have admitted
close to 14,000 Iraqis into the U.S. as refugees, most of whom were Iraqis Christians
or Kurds with relatives in the U.S. Refugee admissions numbers and nationalities
are set annually after consultation with Congress and are not the result of agree-
ments with foreign governments. - . .,. J
Near the end of the Gulf War, Coalition Forces received thousands of civilians and
resistance fighters fleeing the failed uprising and thousands of Iraqi soldiers who
had surrendered. At the end of the war when the Coalition Forces withdrew out of
southern Iraq, most of the soldiers were repatriated. As it was not safe to leave the
civilians and resistance fighters in Iraqi territory, President Bush asked Kind Fahd
of Saudi Arabia if he would offer them temporary refuge in the Kingdom. King Fahd
agreed, and about 9-10,000 resistance fighters and about 4,000 soldiers who refused
to repatriate were sent to a former prison camp at Artawivah, while about 22-
25,000 Iraqi civilians were housed near the border town of Rafha.
When it became obvious that the refugees' stay would be longer than anticipated,
the Saudi Government expended millions of dollars in constructing a modern refu-
gee camp near Rafha with facilities such as air-conditioned houses, schools, chnics,
university extensions and a hospital. When Artawiyah was closed, the resistance
fighters and soldiers (all of whom has been determined by ICRC to have civilian sta-
tus and by UNHCP to be refugees) were relocated to Rafha. One year after the end
of the War, as hopes for a change of regime in Iraq faded, the UNHCR began seek-
ing resettlement opportunities for all the Iragis in Saudi Arabia. As part of a multi-
country effort, the U.S. has pledged its participation.
All Iraqi refugees admitted from Saudi Arabia meet the same rigorous INb and
FBI criteria as Iraqis admitted from other areas, which are the same criteria used
worldwide for refugees of any nationality. There is no special agreement to resettle
Iraqi soldiers in the U.S. as refugees.
Questions for Secretary of State Warren Christopher Submitted by
Senator DeConcini
Question: How many refugees from Bosnia-Herzegovina have been admitted into
the United States? Why is the number so small, especially compared to other coun-
tries?
77
Answer: In fiscal year 93, nearly 1,900 Bosnians were admitted as refugees, the
largest number from any country in Eastern Europe. The U.S., international com-
munity, and the Government of Bosnia-Herzegovina oppose the large-scale resettle-
ment of Bosnian refugees at this time, lest it indicate an acquiescence to ethnic
cleansing. The U.S. admissions program is therefore designed to assist those groups
of special humanitarian concern to the U.S. As the program was expanded in the
middle of fiscal year 93, the admissions figure represents admissions for only a six
month period. Our admissions program for fiscal year 94 has sufficient flexibility
to increase the number of Bosnian refugees resettled in the U.S., if necessary.
Unlike most other countries, the U.S. refugee admissions program offers perma-
nent resettlement to Bosnians. Most other countries have only offered temporary
safe-haven and expect the hundreds of thousand Bosnian refugees located there to
return home once conditions permit. U.S. law, on the other hand, does not provide
for the temporary admission of refugees.
Question: Where do we process those (Bosnian) refugees that want to come to the
United States? Have we informed people at refugee centers that refugee slots re-
main open? If not, why?
Answer: Bosnian reftigees may be processed at any of the designated refugee proc-
essing posts in Europe. These posts are: Athens, Belgrade, Frarifurt, Istanbul, Ma-
drid, Rome, Vienna, and Zagreb. On an exceptional basis, refugees can also be proc-
essed at other posts in Europe
The admissions program for i>jsnians is designed to meet the needs of persons
of special humanitarian concern to the U.S. who require resettlement here. The U.S.
therefore accepts reiugee applications from vulnerable Bosnian Muslim refugees re-
ferred by UNHCR such as former detainees, women victims of violence, torture vic-
tims, and other individuals identified by UNHCR as requiring resettlement in the
U.S. (On a case by case basis, non-Muslim vulnerables referred by UNHCR will also
be considered.) In addition, we include in our resettlement program: a) vulnerable
Bosnians in mixed-marriages of any ethnic group referred for resettlement by
UNHCR; b) Bosnian MusUm relatives of persons lawfully and permanently residing
in the U.S.; and c) parents and siblings of minor U.S. citizen children who have been
displaced by the conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina. UNHCR refers cases identified as
vulnerable to the U.S. program, voluntary agencies publicize the program inside
Croatia, and the Department of State has made announcements so that relatives in
the U.S. are aware of the program.
Question: It is my understanding that there are three basic categories of Bosnians
that can be admitted as refugees, but that one of them — Bosnians with close rel-
atives in the United States — must be Muslims. This assumes that Bosnian Croats
and Serbs can seek permanent refuge in neighboring states. Doesn't this policy go
against our notion of Bosnia-Herzegovina being a multi-ethnic state? This assumes
that Croats and Serbs from Bosnia-Herzegovina, especially those who have sup-
ported keeping the country together, have any real affinity with Croatia or with Ser-
bia, states which invaded their country?
Answer: The permanent resettlement of refugees in third countries, including the
United States, is generally considered to be the least desirable durable solution to
a refugee situation. At this time, the U.S., the international community led by
UNHCR and the government of Bosnia-Herzegovina oppose the large-scale resettle-
ment of Bosnian refugees, lest it send a signal of acquiescence to ethnic cleansing.
The Administration does believe, however, that there are distinct groups of special
humanitarian concern to the U.S., such as the Bosnian Muslim relatives of persons
in the U.S., which do require resettlement here.
It is generally agreed that the Bosnian Muslim population has been the target
of the greatest abuse during the conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Muslim refugees in
Croatia and Serbia are in a qualitatively different position than either Bosnian
Serbs or Bosnian Croats, who are able to Live in those countries in greater safety
and dignity.
Questions for Secretary of State Warren Christopher Submitted by the
Senate Judiciary Committee
Question: Genocide: Why has the State Department only been willing to call what
has happened in Bosnia-Herzegovina "tantamount to genocide?" Is this a legalism
to avoid the requirement to take stronger action under the Genocide Convention?
What is the difference between genocide and what has happened in Bosnia-
Herzegovina?
Answer:
78
• The 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Greno-
cide defines "genocide" as specific acts including killing and causing serious
harm to members of a national, ethnic, racial or religious group with the intent
to destroy, in whole or in part, the group as such.
• There is no question that killing and otner specified acts have been perpetrated
against Muslims, because the;y are Muslims, oy the Bosnian Serbs.
• But determining which specific acts constitute genocide and which constitute
other sorts of hateful attacks, including various actions whose perpetrators
LACKED the broad intent to destroy a particular group, is a very complex legal
issue that must be addressed on a case-by-case basis.
• According to the Convention, only specific acts can be defined as genocide.
Therefore it is improper to refer to wanton violence in Bosnia in general as
genocide.
• We have been examining the legal ramifications of possible genocide findings
for specific acts for some time. We are not adopting a legalistic stance, but rath-
er a responsible and prudent one, when we study the situation thoroughly be-
fore levelling a charge of "genocide" in a give case.
• The Genocide Convention obliges signature states to take appropriate measures
if genocide has been found to have occurred.
• With other nations, we are taking steps in the War Crimes Tribunal to bring
those who have committed atrocities, possibly including genocide, to justice.
• Thus we are not ducking our obligations under the Genocide Convention by at-
tempting to arrive at an accurate, clear decision on which cases fit the descrip-
tion of genocide as defined in the Convention.
• We owe it to the victims of conflicts where genocide has been occurred, includ-
ing the Holocaust, to makesure we use the term in the most judicious manner.
Question: War Crimes Amnesty: Will anyone at an international tribunal, includ-
ing the Serb leadership sitting at the negotiating table, be amnestied from facing
charges of responsibility for ordering or committing war crimes? Will the United
States steadfastly block any effort to grant such amnesties to Radovan Karadzic and
Slobodan Milosevic?
Answer:
• The United States believes that all persons involved in war crimes activities
should be held responsible for their actions.
• The Security Council has determined that those who committed serious viola-
tions of international humanitarian law in the former Yugoslavia should be held
individually responsible for their actions, and has given the United Nations Ad
Hoc War Crimes Tribunal jurisdiction over these crimes. The United States
would oppose any attempt to restrict the Tribunal's jurisdiction. This includes
any attempt to restrict jurisdiction over persons responsible for such crimes,
whether or not they hold high office or positions of power.
• Any agreement among the parties to grant amnesty to war criminals would not
be binding on the Tribunal, which was given its authority by the Security Coun-
cil.
Question: Utility of Continued Geneva Negotiations: The United States wants an
agreement that is fair and embraced by the Bosnian leadership. Do you seriously
believe that the Geneva negotiations can produce such an agreement and that the
Bosnians are not under pressure to accept an agreement they know is neither fair,
just or likely to bring genuine peace?
Answer:
• We believe that the diplomatic process, as opposed to more fighting, offers the
Bosnian people the only chance for a settlement to the conflict that can end the
killing and suffering and build a framework for reconciliation.
• The Bosnian Parliament rejected the territorial arrangements proposed in the
most recent peace plan. The Bosnian government was apparently unwilling to
approve a settlement that would force it to give up substantial areas lost
through ethnic cleansing.
• We respect the decision of the Parliament and have no intention of trying to
force the Bosnian government to accept a settlement it regards as neither viable
nor equitable.
• The international community, through the UN Security Council, has imple-
mented a series of far-reaching sanctions against the Serbian government for
its role in supporting aggression against Bosnia.
• We have informed the Serbs that there can be no movement toward moderating
these sanctions — which have devastated the Serbian economy — until a settle-
ment is reached in Bosnia and the international community sees that it is being
implemented.
79
• We continue to urge the parties to work to achieve a viable and equitable settle-
ment that is acceptable to all sides in this tragic conflict.
Question: Implementation: Is the United States committed to supporting a peace
settlement directly through the inclusion of American forces in an enlarged peace-
keeping operation? Will this be under NATO or UN supervision? How many people
are we talking about?
Answer:
• The U.S. is not committed to enlarging the current UN peacekeeping operation.
In the event a negotiated settlement is reached among all the parties, and if
certain conditions — including Congressional support — are met, we would pro-
pose that the UN to turn over all military aspects of enforcement to NATO. The
UN would manage non-military aspects of the implementation process and mon-
itor other provisions of the peace accord such as the human rights situation,
constitutional agreements, police issues, etc.
• The military operation would use established NATO command and control ar-
rangements, linking political authorities to field commanders through the
NATO chain of command. This asserts NATO and U.S. leadership in the mili-
tary operation. NATO military commanders would cooperate closely with, but
not take orders from, UN civilian personnel.
• On the questions of the overall number of troops and operational plans, I refer
you to the Department of Defense. In this regard, however, I note that it would
not be appropriate for the United States to provide more than half the imple-
mentation force.
Question: Lift and Strike: Can you explain how American interests are better
served by the negotiated settlement plan on the table than by stopping the aggres-
sion with NATO air strikes and lifting the arms embargo? From the point oi view
of saving American lives, would it not be safer to have several hundred Americans,
at most, peacemaking from the air, than tens of thousands attempting peacekeeping
from the ground? Why did we not more forcefully push our preference for more deci-
sive actions?
Answer:
• A viable and equitable negotiated settlement, accepted by all the parties, offers
the best chance to end the conflict with a minimum additional loss of life. The
United States will not participate in an implementation force unless, inter alia,
the parties have demonstrated that they are seriously committed to implement-
ing a peace accord.
• The United States did push the Security Council to lifl the arms embargo and
authorize air strikes, but a majority of the Council's members, including nations
with thousands of troops on the ground in the former Yugoslavia, strongly dis-
agreed with this approach.
Question: CSCE Expulsions: Since the CSCE Missions were expelled from Serbia
and Montenegro at the end of July, conditions in the three regions where they
worked have deteriorated, especially in Kosovo and Sandzak. Albanian and Muslim
activists, for example, have been arrested. What are we, other countries, and the
CSCE doing to try to get Missions back into these places? Can pressure be placed
on the Belgrade regime to permit their return?
Answer:
• The activities of the CSCE Long Duration Missions in Kosovo, Sandzak and
Vojvodina ceased July 30 because the "FRY" government refused to extend
them except upon terms that were unacceptable to the international commu-
nity. The CSCE organized an ad hoc "watch group" in Vienna to monitor the
situation, and the Belgrade embassies of CSCE participating states met to dis-
cuss how they could assume some of the activities of the expelled CSCE mon-
itors. Delegations from Belgrade embassies of CSCE states have visited each of
the regions, as have other American and European diplomats. Reports from vis-
its to the regions are forwarded to the CSCE.
• The Swedish chair of the CSCE has approached the "FRY" numerous times,
most recently on the margins of the UN General Assembly, to seek the resump-
tion of the activities of the Long Duration Missions. "FRY" Foreign Minister
Jovanovic asserted that normalization of international relations with Serbia
continues to be a precondition for readmitting the missions. We and the CSCE
reject such linkage. There are absolutely no signs of any intent by the "FRY"
to relent.
Question: Banja Luka Abductions: On September 10, several prominent Muslims
in the Banja Luka region of Bosnia were abducted by Serb forces, including a Dr.
Muharem Krzic, and have reportedly been beaten or tortured. They were among
80
those who have worked closely with the international negotiation efforts in Geneva.
What can be done to secure their release?
Answer:
• Ambassador Jackovich has approached Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic
to verify this information and express our concerns about the safety and welfare
of Dr. Krzic. We will continue to press the Bosnian Serbs and Serbs for informa-
tion on the whereabouts of Dr. Krzic and his group. We deplore the wanton acts
of brutality that have characterized the Bosnian conflict.
Question: Can you provide us with an update on the smuggling problem? Are
more smuggling ships on the way?
Answer:
— Our diplomatic and law enforcement efforts have made some initial progress
in deterring Chinese alien smuggling. China has responded to our requests by
cracking down on smugglers. Mexico has repatriated over 800 Chinese mi-
grants. Hong Kong arrested a major smuggling gang leader at the FBI's re-
quest.
— However, the problem has not gone away. Interdictions of small groups of
Chinese attempting to cross the U.S.-Mexican border indicate undetected vessel
offloads in Central America. We also continue to receive reports of boats being
readied in Asian ports and of large groups of Chinese waiting in third countries
for the smugglers to move them to the United States.
— ^Analysis of smugglers' operations indicates they are diversifying routes, vessel
types, crews and registry flags to avoid detection. In view of the enormous prof-
its, limited risks, and unlimited numbers, maritime smuggling of Chinese is
likely to increase.
Question 5: Non-immigrant visas for 2nd preference: When will the Department
of State forward its opinion of Senate bill 618, a bill concerning the creation of a
new nonimmigrant visa category which would permit spouses and children under
the age of 21 of legal permanent aliens to wait in the U.S. for their immigrant visas
to become available? Can the Department estimate the number of cases that this
might involve? What steps does the Department believe will be necessary to ade-
quately implement this proposal?
Answer: The Department's report on Senate bill 618 is pending clearance by the
Office of Management and Budget. As you may be aware, this procedure implements
a long-standing requirement that proposed comments by a particular Department
or other elements of the Executive Branch on pending legislation must be coordi-
nated by 0MB. As soon as that process is complete, the Department will transmit
its comments to Subcommittee Chairman Kennedy.
There are about 960,000 applicants registered in the immigration classification
that would benefit from enactment of this provision. The Department estimates that
approximately 220,000 of them would promptly apply for nonimmigrant visas once
the provision became effective.
The surge of applications by beneficiaries of this provision could temporarily dis-
rupt orderly operations at a number of visa-issuing offices, and would require sub-
stantial use of temporary duty personnel. The overall, continuing workload burden
would depend upon the extent to which the visa officer would be required or per-
mitted to inquire into the facts of each case, a question which is not answered by
the bill as written.
Question: In August 1992, UN Security Council Resolution 770 was adopted, call-
ing for "all necessary measures" to be taken to ensure the delivery of humanitarian
aid. Why have we tolerated the blocking of such deliveries by Serb and Croat forces?
Answer: The Administration is very concerned with the deUvery of himianitarian
aid to Bosnia and continues to work with our European allies and the UN to seek
workable solutions to the many problems we face in this effort. Where convoys have
been blocked by the parties to the conflict, and not by other unavoidable situations
such as snow or fighting on the road ahead, both UNPROFOR and UNHCR leader-
ship have felt that negotiation and constant pressure on the warring parties to ac-
cede to the safe passage of humanitarian assistance convoys are the best ways to
get food, shelter, and medical items to those in need. The joint declaration by the
combatants on November 18th which UNHCR Ogata secured to permit the delivery
of humanitarian assistance was in keeping with this strategy. Confrontation witn
the combatants could invite deadly, random attacks or ambushes, or even worse, the
total refusal to allow aid through.
The United States Government has taken very seriously Resolution 770's call
upon states to take all measures necessary to facilitate the delivery of humanitarian
assistance. As of November 29th, the U.S. has flown 1,202 airdrop missions over
81
Bosnia and 2,297 airlift flights into Sarajevo, and since 1991 has provided
$435,780,469 in hvunanitarian assistance.
Statistical Summary of Refugee Admissions to the United States Since 1975
;5 ^
*~ o
*rt o
zo
h- UJ
3"
a. (X
UJ o
• =3
• UJ
< —
« I-
O «
D >-
1—
-J Qio a.
< UJ •
Of
t-h-o
Oh-
u.
»- .-.o o
X 1-
to
u_ < —
<
UJ
UJ (/)
oz
Z300
U- ^
7"
UJ vn
Q^ *>^
_)
Z) <
O X
rouio ■^ ■—
o COCO OMnrorg
O)
o
*o
^£) n
o
m
-■
n
^O
CM \n
■^
n
'O
CM
ocsJOfOoofNjofMomo
CM
m
n
■^
in
a\
cr*
oo
ro
CM
^
in
r*
0^00(MOOlnOC^JOOO
m
o»
CM
ocrvor-oo-^otnuioo
r*
in CM
Csl
00
s£>
in
vO
^
OCTvOvOCS^Csl^vDCDfOO
VO
fO
m
o
Csl
o-^rooooooooooo
CM
rg
n
m
cn
^ in ctJ
— or-noocooo
\o
^
n
oinooocsooo^^o
in
m
f-^
CM
m in CM
r- moo ^
in '<*
■^ CT^cs;
CT*
vO
vo
>j a^
f^
CT.
r^ <M
C7^
OJ
CM
vO
O
o
o
o
r-
<
<_»
l_)
at
u_
<
< <
< ZO < a :x
O UJ >-<
— QC I 5
UJ <
3 ►-. r
•- <
3 < 5
— < X QC *-0 *>-» t/1
rv ^
r^
a^o
^ CM ^
CO ^£>
CM
•~ *"
"
■«
r^ ro
.— ix> r~ m
■V m
^_
a»ro
CM CM --
CM
ro
CM O
CM
in mcM
CT* ro
CM
V
CO ^
mo m ■C
^oo
CO
COOV
CT* (^-^
ino
ro
in
m —
r-'<T —ro
§s
ON
ro -^3
CM
ro
^ r-
CM
\0 fO
CT»
T ^ CM
OCO
r- CM
V
CM o
ro C3 ro f-
y3 O
CM
•— vo r^ r»
r- •—
m
o o in
"" "
-- ro
vO
oo
ooocn
w::
CO
CM CM ro
r-- o
— CM
ro
in o
\0 O x£) <7*
ON^
ro
CO CQ O
(CT. r-
(M CM CM
CM
^ o
3"S5
voeo
oo
in
CM CM ro
vO <^
.— »—
'a^
r- 03 in CM
— CO
^
'3- in p^
ro
VO CM
ro
^"
in CM
CO CO ^£> CM
r-* ■^ CM ro
r^ CT^
_
^ in —
CTN CT*
in
CM
CO
<7^ CM
Tj- CM vO ^D
in in
r^ CM C7^ •—
in o
^O vO ■^
— r--
•— CM
o
o
o
—
,—
u^
in
^
<
Q£
O
1^1
X
<
O
X
<
in
X
ID
O -J
^
^
■<
5555
•-I UJ
>■ •-•
Kn UJ
*n
tn o
< LD
UJ
<
"??
X -* *- z
OL :3
UJ u.
_*
>- w X
3 ^ O ID UJ
gSo.
< X -J i/l •—
UJ
a^cp oo n ^
CM ^
CO
r-* Cp C7^ O 0\0
cM-dF
fO
as
CM
OCO oo roco
OS
\0 in
(M
ro
(M
eT» ■—
CM
CM
ro
^ •— »n(M ^ m
r-
\o
C3^ ^ ^ CM ro
in
tn
CMO oo 0O<7^
o^
ro
CM
r-.ro CM
CM
■^ o roo cM-o-
m
CM
ro
r- rnvD"— for^
r-
-^
\o
ro CD -— C3 •— CM
r^
— r- ro
m
ro
TT — —
r^
CO r^ ^ ro TT in
in CO ro in •—
in
■^ CO CM
CM
in
CM
CM
r^
r^
CM
CM
UJ
a.
o
cc
-1
<
UJ
s ^
z
cc >
ID O
\-
UJ < -1
in
< ^Kn <
UJ
q: z •-' < X z z
UJ < z ej o < <
_i
t— CD </^ — i UJ -J X
1—
< < CD CD t_) Ci- oe
1 UJ
*—
82
o -
a. m
UJ X
o
<«
M
t/1 o
ex
E cn
u. a.
"O 0^
O
< ^
UJ
►_ UI
« t.
X<D
« «
UJ=)
O) 0)
X u.
3 >-
»— UJ
01 —
<
QC f«
Q. OC
U
UJ O
**- VI
o —
u.
.^3
1.
-UJ
fS
ooe
g
CO V r^
o t— u_
»- •-• o o
X I-
>- Q Z to
u. < >-< <
ro X L^
CT» O ^_J
>- <
z tx
=) <
O X
n
m
O so
\£>
n
rt
Tj
^
■^
•^
^0 <NJ
to
CT\
<j^
ro
en
m Tf
r-
o
o
m
m
m —
^
in
CO
fO
in
in
(\i T
-o
00
00
o
o
in
in
CO
00
o
o
•^
■<T
<7*
Ch
r^
p^
■^
T
P>.
o^ ro
csi
in
v£>
§
§
in
in
r-
r~
r-
r-^
a^
CT»
^
^
C
o
z
c
o
o
z
»—
o
UJ
t—
>
UJ
o
•-• ►—
CO
> CJ
O UJ
t/i q:
X
t— ■-•
w
_)
X a: z
<
►-
oo z
o
or^ OCM oo
'- o
rn csj
ON
in
O TT ^CM C3C3
CO O
— (VJ
m
ro
OCSJ OCO OO
o o
^ CNJ
o
CO
0<T» OCftOO CO
CM — TT
o in o^ o o
<7^ ro
CsJ •—
CNJ
O m •— CT* •— C3
o
ro
C3 CM C=> CO C3 C3
CM
o
ro
ro
<— roocM ocsi
in Ti-
CD
C5CM on ^ C3
CNJ
in
00
CM
o -^ o — o o
O CT< O C3> O O
CD O oo O O
.— ■^ r- r^ .— CM
UJ < < Z3 — •
5^ > <J3 U-
CO -J < =3
X < •-• QC M
Z O < i/> »— < UJ
^ _J CD •-< t_J Z
I— O ZD — I < •-• UJ
< LJ (_» UJ X Z >
■c
— o
00
CM CT>
ro
CT»
o
•~
o^r- CSJ o
CO
^ lO —
CT»
in
in
— \o<7» o
U3
ooo
a>
CO
CO
rr looo
CD
CSJ
— lO
r^
VO CM in C3
n
pp in ^
ro
^ mr- o
ro
r*
^ — o
00
in >£>^ o
r-
o in in
ro -^
in
in r^ (M o
«J
in r- in
CM
inco ^ o
r^
CD CD C3
CM CM PO
CO in •— —
in
O CM ^
CM rsj -«*
r-
00
r- CSJ ^ C3
n
\o n r--
r*
Csl
ro •— in —
C3
m\OCD
o
CM — vD
o
^ ^ ^
r*
o
o
o
o
CD
o
X
<
1—
-3
l/l
o
<
lO
\
1-
t—
tn
13
<
55
UJ
'v, 1-
oc
►- 1/>
V^ I-.
UJ
< z
z
UJ < <
<
t—
UJ <•-"■-« to
o
z
o
C3
o
O
o
O
o
O
CD
o
o
O
■^
^3-
%£)
\o
CO
m
o
o
CNJ
CM
o
O
CD
o
o
CD
in
in
CN)
CM
o
o
o
o
c=>
o
CK
o
^
QC
t—
o
h-
Z
t->
»— <
o-t
Of
o
UJ
1—
<_) l/l
<
UJ z
to <t
>
CO
QC
UJ ZD
Q.
t— »_»
<
-_J
> —
<
*—
O
Q.
t—
o
o
o
o
o
o
UJ
>
ex
UJ
l/>
UJ
UJ
(/>
UJ
tx
Q
UJ
<
83
§
5
o
C7V
CT«
CNJ
•V
\n
o
CO
CO
in
in
C3
r^
CO
Csj
(NJ
n
a>
^
o
o
o
o
Ov
<7*
in
«
^
CO
r-
^
^
CT*
ff>
en
<7*
fo
GO
o
CO
est
m
\o
m
m
m
in
O
CO
o
-T
m
-o
r^
CO
^
o
o
o
o
CM
r^
CM
CO
^
CO
m
ro
1-^
«o
*"
—
•—
CO
■V
%o
m
CM
cr*
5
m
m
m
ro
^
CM
<M
CM
CNJ
CM
CM
■«■
«
f i
ig ^>
O
CO
•^
■^
«o
c^
m
?
r-v
4
■^
in
§
CO
CT*
in
<tI
•~
^
f^
r^
^
^
in
r*.
vo
CM
«o
v£>
r^
CO
C3
^
CO
n
CM
—
m
o
o^
o
CO
^
§
CO
•
•—
CM
en
in
m
*o
m
r-
^0
in
in
m
in
■^
O
en
in
n
§
CM
o
CO
en
in
o
ON
in
CO
in
o«
o
r-
PN.
o
CM
m
r»
^
CO
en
CO
CO
^n
<7»
CM
m
in
s£>
o
CM
o
C7^
CO
CO
r«.
GO
vO
\0
CM
TM
r^
o
o
o
"T
<7»
C7V
CM
CO
o
o
•V
CM
in
«
B
«
m
CM
^
r-
in
a?
5
CD
o
o
in
in
r-v
■—
in
C7^
C7^
^J
—
o
VD
lO
CO
03
CT*
in
in
r-
o
vO
n
„
fO
cr»
^
(7»
in
^
J ,
r*'
in
^
■^
m
-a-
in
in
in
TT
ro
o
o
o
o
o
in
<7*
^c
§
r--
n
in
■^
CO
CM
■«
^
<?»
in
CM
^
in
C7*
CO
CM
c^
CM
ro
fM
CM
in
crv
ro
•3-
in
o
in
^o
r^
CO
<?•
CD
CM
ro
'T
r^
en
r^
r^
r^
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
<o
CO
CO
CO
CO
C7^
CT^
cn
(7*
<
C7>
C7N
cr
cr»
c^
C7»
CT^
cr»
CT^
C^
(7N
CTi
ON
(T*
0^
O^
o
84
UJ
trt rt
<J .
> Q-
< o
i-t CO
a. po
Z -3
L.
-1— o
Ct
■9
>s*~
Csl^^^*— ^^^^^^
r* m ro ^ r^
O OO ^ « C9
CD O O C5 O
!?i9
l*-0
t/) _J
Z UJ
5 v>
a <
t- <_>
tj i/i
Q- =>
S z
•-.>- o
t- QC •-<
o < t-
=3t- <
O Z t-i
UJ =D ce
oe —1 1-
ro
o <
O^
VI > Q-
o\
UJ
>-'-
X oc
1-
t—
> •
O t^
"i
x: UJ
o •
t/> oc
<♦>
H-tQt-
o.
xoe z
UJ •
»- ro 13
UJ*rt
o
OOOOC30000C30
OO — OOOOOCDCDO
O00000O0C30O
VOOCNJ^^OOCDO^^
o 0^ •— oca
O C3 C3 (NJ (NJ
O O CD CD C3
^ ^ .— ^ vO
•— CM in
8^
z ♦>
►-« c
o>-
»- <
O I—
9^
r-ovo^tr>coro\ocDCNJo
r» ^ in in c
TJ ^ OV TJ T
CO ^ in <
< z r?
_i o o.
X o
o
X z i-H .-. < ^ q;
l/l Q.
rD O i>-> i<0 »-« Q. O
UJ cx
_Ii<: UJUJi/>Q-Q. z
>- rDZZ>->-'<z<<Dt
i/10<00<— JC7<^UJJUJ
•-* -^
Of X
I— n
<ZOOO— I'-'ZO-QT'-'X
Z -J
0<ZZ<X'-'<0<l-
o >-
t— XX'-<»-*XQ.v^'-ji£t— O
O t/0
t>n
(_J <
C3 CD O CD « O
CD CDCD CD « CD
CD O CD O « O
r— CNJ
Tj- (X) r- •— CD
CT* in fo ■^J m
r- CT» <— CT»
CM ro -— r*
in in CT» m CNJ
— CO r-' o oo
<— r- CD v£) in
':r?
1 5
O O UJ
z
.-. < KH
<
X _> >
_J
1 t i
<
X
O O Q
h-
515
_,
<
»—
< < < O
XXX
t—
O O CD O <
O O O CD • CD
CD CD O CD * CD
CD CD CD CD »
OO CD C3 CD
O CD CD O CD
O O O O O
CDC3 CDCD O
O O CDCD O
•— <NJ
CD CD CD CO
§§
o cr« — CD CD
^ lO CT* ^ in
CD CD CD 00 ■^ CM
^ in
CM CM
UJ m
O UJ
oc -^ z
UJ X f- z
X O O UJ Q- <
X ^ < w Q <i
b<: X _; > o I-
<
I I I I I CD
I- (- 1— 1— (- O
< < < < < t-
CD ^3 CD CD CD ^D
o: _j z
UJ X t— X
X C3 O UJ O
X ►-.<.-. X
b^ X -( > :i^
:^ :^ ^ :>^ <
*-« t-< t-t »-< X
Z Z Z Z CL
< < < < <
Z Z Z Z t-
< < < <I o
X X X X I—
Q. tX Q- Q- CO
2^
85
m ^ <7» in •—
^ CSJ <NJ ONO>
CM <— ^
O ^^ O « O
O O O O O
o>- o
»-• er »-«
(-<(-
<J>- <
O 5 Q£
Ul -J »-
CKO <
> a.
>- 5 s
1- w
»-t V
>
<•>
»-• _J UJ
(-r> ■■
5 S
i^g t
•»Ot-
•- *-«a z
u 1- S
o m
o
5 •
h. >-
UJ
«•—
VI
«
UJ u
o
VI M
u —
o
Zb.
»—
»-«
^
o
z
l-«
en t/»
<y« z
o
_J t-<
< 1-
<_) •-.
t/1 o
UJ ^
Li- O
Z Ul C7>
£3
f^CNiCT*m*0^^^^^^
^^^^^CD^^^^^
in CT« -^ ^ f-.
c> ^ ^
CM m CO ^ mm
n r* vo C3 —
■— •— CM
*o CM in in ^
,-o ro CO \o
CT^^r^r^-T^inrO'— (
^ O* <T»
'tr CM •—
Ov— •—
^9
- ►-
t/>X <
0O^(NI0OrOCOCT>^^CSJ^
rOcM^cOCTi — cor^ ^
in vo *o vo CTi r«. •—
O O O C3 O
vo ro •— r^ r^.
— CO r-» coo
CT\ ^ m m •—
vo c\j — n 'T
•— \o ^ ^ m
00 in CO •— n
VO CO
CO o >— — \0
CM •— •- m
rO <T» CM
ro CM CO ■^ r^
o» ^o n CO CM
CM *— CT« 'T
r»- <7\ •— C7^
CO vo o <7* n
CM o r^ m ^
rg o — "* 00
O i/>
O < < Z UJ
t_>
X Z ►-« M < .-. QC
t>^ a.
Z> O tn i/-» K-t Q. O
UJ ac
— ' :m: UJ UJ in a. a.
•-• ^
>- IDZ Z >• .-. <
a: SL
*^(j<00<_iO
»- :3
■<Z<-JQQ--I«-«Z
Z -J
o< Z Z < I^
-J >„
O i/l
in
CJ <
o ^ ^ ^ ■ ^
CD ^O C9 R O
C3 ^ ^ ^ ■ ^
^ ^^ C7« ■ 0\
^ O ^ ^ ■ O
^ ^ ^ r^ ■ r«.
^ ^ o ^ ^
^^0 C3 ^ vO
in r^ •— ^ n
^ ^ o ^ ^
^ CD C3 O C3
■^ in in o 2
^ CM "£>
CT* <— .—
^ SO CT* ^ in
O ^ ^ •— — CM
00 <7» r-
: o o
; •-■ <
: X -I
> -J
I <
I O Q Q *-
I _J _] _» <
: < < < o
- - - , _■ X X X I-
■^^l— O |l— »— t— »-co
5 §
X O O UJ CL •
X •-«<>— Q •
i^ X _» > o ^
►—»—►—►— I— o
00 CD CD CD ^0 CO
5 5
i£ X _J > ^
I I I I z
z: X X X I-
o o o o <
X X X X z
ii i^ ^ ^ <
•-••-••-••-• X
Z Z.Z Z CL
< < < < <
< 5 < ••t o
X X X X l-
Cl. C^ Ol CL CO
in
86
■i
»s
^
OOU3CO'— u^o^^Oln^O(M■—
ro CO ro cr» ^ oo n »— ^
•— CM ^ —
^O^C30^C30CDC3^
•— — ro .— m
r-. ^ ro ui ^
ro»£>pn^^r*.r*.r^'— — CO
CO c^ CO ^ cj »— ^ m r^
^ p-*i/ics«» mcMo^cocNieM
CD «— CO oo m
o^ CM n r^ fo
•— m ^ in •—
CJ foeo r** ^
r^ •- in CM r-
^ r^ro mo
CSJ C50 OCJ
r*- o r-
•— C3 —
^ •— CM
•- o n \o o
CO •— 0^ r^ vO
^ \OCM C3 C3
m \A CO CO vo
CM CM "- P^ CM
CO ■v lO inro
•— CM ^ CM f—
CM r* CM o •—
r-» in m ro*—
^ ocM men
r-
vooo^co^r^CTxcO'— cor^
oo csi cTt ^ en
o^ o^
mr-cocooDmmcMc?nm
CO vo r^ CO ^ ^CM CM ^ CO
r- — -^ »oo
g-
cr* «* *o COON
»-• _»
CT^r- m ^ CO ■^ m ■<J g
•— CM in mm ^
o cMm r- o
^- ►-!
m CO C7t VO C7N
»-* 0£
CM — CM
CM — — •— r-
O Q.
9<
2
O
r--ovoT"^oomvoofMC3
vO ■— CO -T O P- CT*0 -^
■^ cor^ — o
V» w
<7» m m ^ m
- 1—
^ CO mcM r^ a» •—
r* ON •— CTN
1/lX <
l-l t— _J
pv C3 CO m
CMco — r^
X z ^
ro ^
CM .— en
t- O OL
X o
UJ
UJ X 1— o
X
X OO UJ2
§i
X -« < •- <
^ X -1 > — I
trt
U-
1 1 UJ
1 r 1 1 <
O irt
o
< < Z UJ
X
o
5g
^ ^ < ^ oe
O Q O Q 1—
to ca-
tiO l>^ t-t Q. O
5551-
UJ QC
-J :^
UJ UJ (/> ex. Q.
3
►-• '-v
V
^
gg5"3
1
<
a:
-J .-J -I -J <
q: r
i/l o <
UJ :7 UJ
1— Z3
< z
1-) a o -» •-• z
a.
Q£
X
< < < <o
Z —1
o
2
Z Z < X «
I-. .-. £ CL */l
< O <t-
X X X X i-
=J >
1- X
<-> i*:
t—
O 1
»-»-►-»- m
O OO
l/l
3
CJ <
^
oo
§ 5
> ^O O « C3 O O
^ ^^ ^C3 O
> »— r- « cog *3 ^*o^^*— r^
en ^ ^ ^ CO CO
— '- •— •— ^- CM
^o^^« oo ^ oooo^^
ot r^ r*. ^ ^ ^ ^
— m p^
CM CM ^ ■— « m^
<^ covo CM o m
m ** m CT* en
^ ^ r^ DOCM
.— ■^ mcM
— CM
CO CM o 'tr « o T
in c? en ONCO
CT» ^ ^ r^ m
^ C3 C3 CO
•— (M »0 »- CM ^ •—
ID^
m
pncM ON en ^ CM
NO CM
m
m CM ON
.— CM
§°§
^ <A ot ^ ^ in
5 5
O O
-.- X
a. »~4
X .-•
:*: X
O UJ
< ►-«
-J >
8i2
<
I I CO
3
—I
3
»— I— t— »— I— »— O O
<<<<<<»- I—
CC3 CD CO CQ CD CD CD tO
2 X -I >
I I I I
o5o3o<
X XX X X z
2 ^ :>£ ^ :^ <
•-»•-• "-t t-t •-. X
2 2 Z Z Z CL
13l33&
X X X X X t-
c^ a. c^ a. a. CD
^
S
§•
V So
moo
^ CM m
CM •— vO
.— CM
in m ON
p~. r^ r-
CT^ On ON
O • >—
►— tn
• <
UJ ^ z
CO t-»
UJ O X
Z OC o
t— UJ h-
UJ X
>55
87
uj a.
OC3 ^ r-
— <si CO o
\0^ • — cr* CT>
o^ .— ^ ^ .—
3 3
<7N
QC >- t-
>■
O^
.^32
^%
- t- oc
u
n: z»-
> o
*
t- :d<
•-« -o
i
Z -1 Q.
>— ■!<
O OUJ
O «
Of
a: > Qc
< •
*J
00 ^ ^- r— fo ^ ro
^- ON vO m CO CO
— fsi en o>
-— »— CM
"8
o z t-
!-• ID<
H- _j a.
<_> O UJ
o
UJ
OL Z
ro • — ^ ro ^ rn
ro r- CD •— •—
o in \£> ro m
•— •— fSi
(\j m r- in ^ t/i cw
r^ 00 in in in •—
.— cvi T ^ r^
vo ^ Q vo ON m
in eo ^ ro o ^
— \o r-» CM o c\j
^ CM *£> rofo \o
rv CNj ON — •—
$
(7» •— CD O
^ •— NO O
■— ^ fsj
Kn >-
—i »/>
< <
>
CM CO O
NO fO Q
CM — ^
-o <u
E liJ
C T3
3 S
1J C
— <
<— TJ
^ z
x: •—
1/1 t—
cnxo
< UJ
— o <
X -J -J
W(_» >
v»Q.
1 —1
^ QC —J
<
<
o t-
< o
z o
_J t—
> t-
lb
to
C T3
T) C
.— TJ
JZ ^ l/l >— <t
o> > o < UJ y-
•^ o < K-i o
X -I -J -^ o > *~
trt Q.
I —I — QC -J Q
■< < Z
O t- 1 h- <
88
^g
.- I«
•r- C
4 -M
^ «
1— •<-
>
•^-'
M '~^
1
•S.n
ITJ 0*
O) u
u UO^
c o
*i o»a*
•r- a.
>- c o^
*/>
»- 3 i-
I-* OO. 1-
>o •
iu,
^ 1. o.
•r- Of
UJ»- « «
r- C
uj a.*/)
o-o •
^ CL
3 c o >-
a.
I
1^
«n 3 "V O
UJ i. a.
Z o o «
!-*■*> Of
Q 1. -O f
»-«••> r— C
t- U O
4x2:
I
^ r^ o
— ^ r\j
^
<
z
..- ■>- ji
89
I!
•«- c
£ •
>
•I
5 c o ti
u. m >-
4/1 b. f«
u • • u
4A3-0 vt
U k-^
I Ol
•-) 4^ •—
1. u
l« X
C1.UJ
• ^^
o
^ ^ ^
csi •— <—
r> CO 1/)
•— r^ pn
•- CM
t^ >- '<3
S
90
^ .- •«*
• E
^S
n 0)
c o
^ r^ r- (M
m lO ON •—
<— ^ if> in
Q. Vt
^ C7t
>- c oin
t- 3 t. r--
■_■ o a. o^
>o ^
»-« ii
I- -D Ui—
O U 3^
< •.- -t^ u
UJ *- « < <— C
u a. .^ .^
O "o «i « x: Q.
3 c o o
U. !« C
UJ >*-•-
QC •»—</>
*/> I-
Ui • « 41
t/> ID -O >
UJ »- -^
z o o *>
Q »- "O 3
2 3 3 <_)
L. U
O-UI
.— ^ ro
r^ in
•— CD
-- 00
r^ ro »—
r^ ^ ro
T •— v£>
n p^ r-
in •—
to
OJ
«
in
a
eg
<7^
r*
§
in
CT\
vO
ro
en
vO
r*
ro
CO
in
in
o
CSJ
en
TT
CO
o
m
ro
^
>o
CD
m
r-
>o
^o
r*
r-
CM
^
n
o
r»
fO
oo
m
r*-
CO
r^
rt
00
CJ
CT"
m
in
r^
GO
m
CM
in
5!
esi
m
^
"
m
rr
^
r^
o
CO
m
C3
r*>
a^
cr\
r^
m
CM
CT\
'^
ro
CNJ
vo
C7\
^
-X)
vo
o
in
r->
CO
in
CO
vD
CO
'^
n
'J
c>
■^
en
■^
r*
rs(
■^
ro
■"_
tSJ
r^
in
. CM
1J
^/>
O
ZD
•—
^
■o
TJ
c
rt
O
\-
KD
91
rj-— cMiD vomo — eo •—
CO r». m Q(D(7>«^ro\o ro »/> cvj tt cp — on cm cp •— m in cm ^
ro\o^ ^ •— Ot ^ CM CT> o CO CO vo CM \D ^ n CM ro ^ •—
<— o CM — CO — p"* CT» CT» o ro r-. ro CD ON moo •— r*
00 eo CM <n »— r* ro -— •—rococo o »— r-*
CM — — p^r-\oo^o^u^i/ir-
CM <— CM m \0 CO ^ — CO »—
CO r^ i/i
m vo ^
— O CM »-
^ ^ ^ ^
•— 0^ C3 O CD •— <— CM *£>
\£> CM ir> ^ ^ r-
r» ro ^ •— -— ^
m •— r*
ocs^^oo^^o^^o
o o o o ^ o
O-ro
o o^ ri
I- <— OH
■-■ u • -in
h- — ^ X It
o c E on
< ^ « »-« H
esooooooocDcaoo
OO CDO OCD
> ^ CM tf> — CO -^
\£) m ro If) in
O CM CTt ^O
CO in r^ lO
J «• o
4 3 «
CDOOOOOC3CDCDC3C3C3
C3 O CD CD O CJ
«
5 1!
a. a. z
UJ o UJ *-* o
Q z o oo z
X < o-» <
»— I/) X </i UJ X
O QC Z UJ Z OUJ
ZZO O 3 QC OOtlC
<<z M< arsiQC
:i_j i-.i<3i-iOL<— I
l*0^3QeO«-HUJcj£ t-t<
< »-• < 5 o oc X o t- oc I-
X >-^X<OUJX<00
5 1— t— Z ►— I—
— --— -ix»-':3
: ti. > *rt
t*^ »-« »—
< UJ o
QC o »—
UJ Z CO
x:d rs
;5 2
! ^ o
»— t— CD
: < oe tic 3
I CL a. QC l/>
O o
o O
z Of
UJ O- -J
55
t— O to ►— 3 CD to t— H- Z
<ZO < >-> Z O <o <
5<xozx<xozi- 3e
•-ia.z<^>-<a.Z<a) —*
XX<OX'->X<OX3 <
c^i_>zza.to(^zza.bo i—
o) z n
♦J z> M
a> o M
QUI)
o z
Q. <
< -I
5 :^ 5 2
92
-i
/ u. «
ui a.
UJ--
o
CO <—
cr»
cvj \o
a*
^ *o o
^ en '—
CM *a <7»
d;§
t—
5
— •"
>
>- •- Q CJ
TT •— in
CM
in
>
o r^ o r^
S - §
m
CO
C
— >
<
rO ^ p^
^ CO CT»
CM vO CO
CO
8<i
tn
r>
o
<ii
en
«
o en
--» D
CM \0 CO
CM CM
295
1,181
1.476
o
E i/»
o t_>
U Q.
o
E -i^
o en
i- C
u_ <0
m
CM >£> CO
CM <St
in -— vo
C7» CO r^
CM — 'S^
O
>
u
<
c *_>
OOOv CO
— CM
CO
CM
E
E C
O ■>-'
:>
1.464
64
20
1.538
TJ- \£) O
CO ^ C3
307
1,218
1,625
vO
ro
c
o
m
o
1/1
t/l
U
cn
o
Q.
J3
<•»
o
z
Regular Subprogram
rami 1 y Reuni f ication
Former USG Employees
Others
Subtotal
{of whom are Khmer)
Asian American Subprogram
Amerasian Children
Accompanying Relatives
Subtotal
Re-Education Camp Subprogram
Former Re-Ed Prisoners
Accompanyi ng Rel ati ves
Subtotal
1— E
O JI
1*
u
ij
E
O
o
1
1
93
ui w
UJ 3 ■—
O *-» n:
Z> I- w
UJ o. ■•-
Of « 1^
oo
u ■*■>
cn
en
q, u
-C 3
*> -o
O Oi
a;
'
cr.
en
01 1- -.J
-C -^ c
■«J JC 3
O »— O
U
o in (M n-
<M CM — in
(^ — en ^
(Ma» --
r^ — CO
^ in vo
Tj- in CT«
o ae
m in in
mr^ CO
fOvD CM
(M CT> *—
r* ^ CO
CM CO o
u
O-
6,736
491
157
7.384
^O y£>
in in
CO
— —
/■
—
t/1
>
CM — CM in
o -- "—
CM CM
m
CM
inn *o
C7.0O •-
ro <— —
CM r^ <T>
CM >iD
CM CM
r- in o
Tj ^ in
<^ a\ m
CM oo •—
■C^
^
^
S3
f^
r*
vO
vO-V
o a>
^-
CM
in CT»
^
p-
l/>
3 01
•~
CM
^
t/l QC
*^
I/)
E w)
o
O l_J
C7*
u„ CC
3
•*-
P^ O P^
^
^
^
S3
CM
r^
CO in CM
\£>
e-S
vOTf
o a>
^■
incT*
^
r»-
L._ »fl
-—
CO
_
m r^
o
O
^co
o
t/i
roin
<7*
c o
•— m
^
^
W)
oc
«9
E
lO ^ in
rr 00
in CM
P^
cy»r^
vO
p- CO
Tj .— »—
p^
-^ rj
\o
<T*<— ro
ro
<<^<T^
CM
■a' in
CT»
^ m
in
in o
CM
Csl
>
C W»
a»
O 4f
-C
*J >^
E ■D o
«T> U ^
I. — CL
CP*- E
TJ
O -^ UJ
I. c
fl o
x> a*in
tH
3 oc 13
o^
>^ L
^
^ ■*-
\~
D O
TJ— E
u^ ^
^ E L
C
3 « O
♦J
0>u. u.
o
0.04*9
X> I- ^
3 "O 01
— q; c o
*j ffl *>
ID I- o. .n
tj (U G 3
94
3 9999 05983 076 8
1 PO -—
o
C7V ^
■— to
rO O. •
*J O Z>
oo
<— in
CM in
CO m r-
CT« r- r-
■t r* r-
CM vO
in -^
CM P^ C7*
C7> CO r-
\o •— CO
r^ CM m
o CM r-*
in CM CM
in v£> ■—
— m in
o "^ ^
m
m v£> ■—
CM
ro in
CO
in vD
^
<o
m
ro
C7* PO ^£>
CO
CM
CM
rO
Q.
en
n
^
^
1
_r
O
O
o*
(_)
5
CM in r-
^
vo in
.—
.—
^
>
? -
CM
'J-
*"
z
CD »— in
vO
O CM
CM
ro ^
P-
in C7^
4
>
CM (7*
^ axvo
vO
.— CM
r^
in
•— CM
15"
UJ CL 3
O 3
X -o
oo
^ .— TJ-
CT» in o
CT^ in in
5-'
in -—
E i/>
o t_>
I- a.
C7%
in
^0
c^ ^ -^
o in o
r^ in in
^3-
P-*
CT*CM
— r--
^7 r^
<7»
p^ in
o
CO
3
O
tn
CM --
^3
•~
^ o
r- \0
in
r^
CD
in
o
in
o
in r^
-O CO
u: CTi
CM
CsJ
in
2§
^0
ro
m
ro
p-~
vo
o
v£> •— r-
o — CO
vo ■^ —
CM C7^ -—
CO 05 r^
*£> o r^
<£> in —
*4~ <H ^
.- L CO
U) c^
CT>C> O
O CL. *J
1. 0£.
E fO O
rO (J I —
cr.-»- e
O ■-- UJ
u c
D DC ^
>-. I. irt
1. r- Of 1-
o) — e a-
— 6 >- j:
3 OJ O •->
Olli. Li. O
a>
Q. (U
n)
JD 1-
3 T3
<U
OO ,—
QC
m
m C_>
c
U
r
OJ
E vi
u.
li
O
79-707 (100)
ISBN 0-16-044384-9
9 780160
443848
0000
!
[
i
4
1;